Draft June 2018
Tule River Basin 2018 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents
Section A – Introduction A-1
A.1 Purpose of the IRWM Plan A-1 A.2 IRWM Plan Benefits A-1 A.3 2016 IRWM Grant Program Guidelines A-2 A.3.1 Meeting the 2016 IRWM Plan Guideline Requirements A-3 A.3.2 Addressing Comments from 2015 IRWMP Submission A-7 A.4 Point of Contact A-9
Section B – Governance, Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach B-1
B.1 Introduction B-1 B.1.1 State IRWM Guidelines: Governance and Stakeholder Involvement Standards B-1 B.1.2 IRWM Program Participants B-1 B.2. IRWM Organizational Structure B-2 B.2.1 Governance Structure B-2 B.2.2 Stakeholders Advisory Group B-4 B.2.3 Memorandum of Understanding B-4 B.2.4 Notice of Intent to Prepare the IRWM Plan B-4 B.2.5 Notice of Intent to Adopt the IRWM Plan B-5 B.3 Long Term Implementation of the IRWM Plan B-5 B.3.1 Governance B-5 B.3.2 Stakeholder Advisory Group B-5 B.3.3 Actions of the RWM Group Governing Board B-6 B.3.4 Meetings B-6 B.3.5 Updating or Amending the IRWM Plan B-6 B.3.6 Outreach to DACs and Tribal Communities B-8
C - Region Description C-1
C.1 Introduction C-1 C.2 Tule River Basin Relevance as an IRWM Planning Area C-1 C.3 Water Resources C-3 C.3.1 Tule Subbasin C-3 C.3.2 Tule River Watershed C-4 C.3.3 Ancillary Watersheds C-4 C.4 Biological Resources C-4 C.4.1 Aquatic Sensitive Species C-4 C.4.2 Freshwater Habitats C-5 C.4.3 Areas of Special Biological Significance C-5
C.5 Geologic Resources C-5 C.5.1 Basement Complex C-6 C.5.2 Marine Rocks C-6 C.5.3 Unconsolidated Deposits C-6 C.5.4 Lacustrine and Marsh Deposits C-7 C.5.5 Reduced Older Alluvium C-8 C.5.6 Oxidized Older Alluvium C-8 C.5.7 Younger Alluvium C-9 C.5.8 Geohydrology C-9 C.6 Existing Water Management Systems C-10 C.6.1 Major Infrastructure C-12 C.6.2 Wastewater Service Providers C-15 C.6.3 Flood Control Districts C-16 C.7 Land Use Agencies C-18 C.8 Water Quality C-19 C.8.1 Groundwater Quality C-19 C.8.2 Surface Water Quality C-20 C.8.3 Arsenic C-22 C.8.4 Nitrate C-23 C.8.5 Perchlorate C-24 C.8.6 Hexavalent Chromium C-25 C.8.7 Potential Sources of Contamination C-26 C.9 Cultural, Social, and Economic Profile C-29 C.9.1 Local Organizations and Associations C-30 C.9.2 Local Traditions and Community Events C-31 C.9.3 Demographic Information C-31 C.9.4 Projected Population Growth C-34 C.9.5 Economic Conditions and Trends C-35 C.10 Key Region Wide and Watershed Specific Issues C-36 C.10.1 Tribal Community Water Challenges C-36
Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget D-1
D.1 Introduction D-1 D.1.1 Use of IRWM Plan for Determining Adequacy of Water Supplies Under Senate Bill 610 and 221 D-1 D.2 Water Management Districts D-1 D.2.1 Lower Tule River Irrigation District D-1 D.2.2 Pixley Irrigation District D-3 D.2.3 Porterville Irrigation District D-4 D.2.4 Saucelito Irrigation District D-5 D.2.5 Tea Pot Dome Water District D-6 D.2.6 Terra Bella Irrigation District D-7 D.2.7 Porterville (2015 Urban Water Management Plan) D-9 D.2.8 Unincorporated Urban Community Service Districts D-10 D.3 Groundwater Supply: The Tule Sub Basin D-11 D.4 Regional Supply and Demand Balance D-12 D.5 Water Supplies and Demand Through 2040 D-13 D.5.1 Projected Urban Water Demand D-13 D.5.2 Projected Agricultural Water Demand D-15 D.5.3 Predicted Changes to Regional Water Supply D-15 D.5.4 Plan to Reduce Dependence on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Supply D-16
Section E – Goals and Objectives E-1
E.1 Introduction E-1 E.2 Process and Determination of IRWM Plan Goals and Objectives E-1 E.2.1 Stakeholder Input: Identifying Critical Water Issues E-2 E.2.2 Consistency with Applicable Resource Documents and Management Plans E-2 E.2.3 Regional Priorities E-6 E.3 Adopting the IRWM Goals and Objectives E-7 E.4 IRWM Goals and Objectives E-8 E.4.1 Maintain or Improve the Health of Ecosystems within the Region E-9 E.4.2 Protection of Life, Structure, Equipment and Property from Flooding E-9 E.4.3 Reduction of Contamination of Surface and Groundwater Resources E-10 E.4.4 Expand Regional Response to Climate Change through Mitigation and Adaption Strategies E-12 E.4.5 Work toward Achievement of Sustainable Balanced Surface and Groundwater Supplies E-13 E.4.6 Goals and Objectives Metrics E-15 E.5 Prioritization of IRWM Goals and Objectives E-17
Section F – Resource Management Strategies F-1
F.1 Introduction F-1 F.2 Resource Management Strategies F-1 F.2.1 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency F-2 F.2.2 Urban Water Use Efficiency F-4 F.2.3 Crop Idling for Water Transfers F-5 F.2.4 Irrigated Land Retirement F-5 F.2.5 Conveyance – Delta F-6 F.2.6 Conveyance – Regional/Local F-6 F.2.7 System Reoperation F-7 F.2.8 Water Transfers F-7 F.2.9 Flood Risk Management F-8 F.2.10 Agricultural Lands Stewardship F-8 F.2.11 Economic Incentives (Loans, Grants and Water Pricing) F-9 F.2.12 Ecosystem Restoration F-9 F.2.13 Forest Management F-10 F.2.14 Recharge Area Protection F-11 F.2.15 Sediment Management F-11 F.2.16 Outreach and Engagement F-12 F.2.17 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage F-13 F.2.18 Desalination F-15 F.2.19 Precipitation Enhancement F-15 F.2.20 Recycled Municipal Water F-16 F.2.21 Surface Storage – CALFED F-17 F.2.22 Surface Storage – Regional/Local F-17 F.2.23 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution F-17 F.2.24 Groundwater Remediation/Aquifer Remediation F-18 F.2.25 Land Use Planning and Management F-18 F.2.26 Matching Quality to Use F-19 F.2.27 Pollution Prevention F-19 F.2.28 Salt and Salinity Management F-19 F.2.29 Urban Runoff Management F-20 F.2.30 Water-Dependent Recreation F-20 F.2.31 Watershed Management F-20 F.2.32 Water and Culture F-21 F.3 Resource Management Strategy Review F-22
Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization G-1
G.1 Introduction G-1 G.2 Phase 1: Project Solicitation and Acceptance of Abstract Forms G-2 G.3 Phase 2: Project/Program Evaluation and Scoring G-2 G.3.1 Objectives Worksheet G-3 G.3.2 Readiness to Proceed (RTP) Questionnaire G-4 G.3.3 Supplemental Scoring G-5 G.4 Phase 3: Final Evaluation, Notification, and Selection of IRWM Projects G-5 G.5 Updating the Project List G-5 G.6 Procedures for Displaying List of Approved Projects G-6 G.7 2018 Tule River Basin IRWM Project List G-6
Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts H-1
H.1 Introduction H-1 H.2 Consideration of Goals and Objectives H-1 H.3 Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Project Benefits/Impacts Analysis H-5 H.4 Consideration of Climate Change in Benefits/Impact Analysis H-5 H.5 Consideration of DACs and Tribal Communities in Benefits/Impacts Analysis H-5 H.6 Consideration of Other Resources in Benefit/Impacts Analysis H-6
Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring I-1
I.1 Introduction I-1 I.2 Performance Measures and Monitoring Methods I-2 I.2.1 Evaluation of Capacity to Evaluate and Implement Projects I-5 I.2.2 Project-Level Performance and Monitoring Plan I-5
Section J – Data Management J-1
J.1 Introduction J-1 J.2 Data Needs within the IRWM Region J-2 J.3 Current Data Programs and Data Collection Techniques J-2 J.3.1 Groundwater Elevations J-2 J.3.2 Stream Flow J-3 J.3.3 Precipitation, Weather, and Climate Change J-3 J.3.4 Reservoir Storage and Release Flows J-3 J.3.5 Point and Non-Point Pollution Discharge J-4 J.3.6 Groundwater Quality J-4 J.3.7 Surface Water Quality J-5 J.3.8 Land Use and Population J-5 J.3.9 Agricultural Water Demand J-5 J.3.10 Urban Water Demand J-5 J.4 Regional Data Management System J-6 J.4.1 Data Collection J-7 J.4.2 Database Maintenance J-7 J.4.3 Data Sharing J-7 J.4.4 Interface with State Database Systems J-7 J.4.5 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Measures J-7
Section K – Financing Strategies K-1
K.1 Introduction K-1 K.2 Program Level Funding Sources K-1 K.2.1 In-Kind Support K-1 K.2.2 Connect Stakeholder Grant Funding Opportunities to Tule River Basin IRWM K-2 K.2.3 Fee-for-Service K-2 K.2.4 State and Federal Grants K-2 K.3 Project Level Funding Sources K-2 K.3.1 Funding of Project Applications K-3 K.3.2 Projects Funding K-3 K.3.3 Grants and Loans (State and Federal) K-3
Section L – Technical Analysis L-1
L.1 Introduction L-1 L.2 Technical Information Sources and Data Used L-1 L.2.1 The Water Resources Investigation (WRI) l-1 L.2.2 USGS Water Quality Portal l-2 L.2.3 The Crop Water Use Model l-2 L.2.4 Community Climate System Model 3.0 (CCSM3) l-3 L.2.5 Groundwater Management Plan I-3 L.2.6 Water Management Plans l-3 L.2.7 Population and Demographic Information I-4
Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning M-1
M.1 Applicable Land Use Plans M-1 M.1.1 Tulare County General Plan M-1 M.1.2 City of Porterville General Plan M-1 M.1.3 Unincorporated Community Plans M-2 M.1.4 National Forest Land Management Plan M-2 M.2 Applicable Water Management Plans M-3 M.2.1 Urban Water Management Plan M-3 M.2.2 DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan M-3 M.2.3 Local Water Shortage Contingency Plans M-3 M.2.4 Capital Improvement Plans/Master Plans M-4 M.2.5 Water Management and Monitoring Programs M-4 M.3 Local Climate Change Planning M-6 M.3.1 Tulare County Climate Action Plan M-6 M.3.2 Climate Change Adaption and Mitigation Strategies in Local Land Use Plans M-6
Section N – Planning Coordination N-1
N.1 Introduction N-1 N.2 Coordinate Water Management Activities to Avoid Conflict N-1 N.3 Pre-Project Coordination Efforts N-2 N.3.1 Outreach to Neighboring Regions N-2 N.3.2 Outreach to Disadvantaged Communities N-2 N.3.3 Outreach to Native American Tribal Communities N-2 N.4 Activity Coordination with Adjacent Regions N-3 N.4.1 Coordination with Tulare Basin JPA Development N-3 N.5 Coordination with State and Federal Agencies N-3 N.5.1 Water Resource Management of Two Primary State Agencies N-4 N.6 Water Service Cooperative Agreement and Other Coordination Efforts N-5
Section O - Climate Change O-1
O.1 Introduction O-1 O.2 Greenhouse Gasses and Climate Change O-1 O.2.1 Regulatory Setting O-4 O.3 Climate Change Trends O-7 O.4 Climate Change Impacts O-9 O.4.1 Water Supply O-9 O.4.2 Water Quality O-11 O.4.3 Flooding O-11 O.4.4 Wildfire O-11 O.4.5 Effects of Climate Change on Runoff and Recharge O-12 O.4.6 Effects of Sea Level Rise O-12 O.5 Regional Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment O-13 O.5.1 Summary of Vulnerability Assessment O-18 O.5.2 Vulnerability Prioritization O-19 O.5.3 Further Data Gathering and Analysis of Prioritized Vulnerabilities O-19 O.6 Climate Change Adaption O-20 O.6.1 Water Supply O-20 O.6.2 Water Quality O-21 O.6.3 Flooding O-21 O.6.4 Saltwater Intrusion O-21 O.7 Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Project Review Process O-21 O.5 Consideration of Climate Change in Project Review Process O-22
Section P – Water Management Opportunities P-1
P.1 Introduction P-1 P.2 Water Management Opportunities P-1 P.2.1 Water Supply Augmentation Measures P-1 P.2.2 Water Demand Reduction Measures P-2 P.2.3 Flood Control Projects and Programs P-3 P.2.4 Water Quality Improvement Opportunities P-3 P.3 Other Water Management Measures P-3 P.3.1 Land Use Policies P-3 P.3.2 Water Supplies for New Development P-4 P.3.3 Agricultural Crop Water Management Measures P-4 P.3.4 County Systems Infrastructure Improvements P-5
Section Q – References Q-1
Appendices
Appendix A: Memorandum of Understanding Appendix B: State IRWMP Requirements Tables Appendix C: Joint Powers Agreement Outline Appendix D: Surface Water Sampling Locations Appendix E: Water Quality Data Appendix F: Groundwater Well Locations Appendix G: Memorandum of Potential Training and Technological Assistance Activities Appendix H: Project Solicitation and Scoring Forms
Section A Introduction
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
Section A - Introduction
This section describes the purpose of the Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) and the regulatory guidelines that motivate the contents of the plan. This section describes how the IRWMP meets the 2016 California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Guidelines, and requirements for DWR approval.
A.1 Purpose of the IRWM Plan
The purpose of an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) is to document and detail the approach of participants within a watershed as to their methodologies for coordinating and integrating management of available water resources. The IRWMP is to detail how an area’s management methodologies will improve available water supplies, manage flood and drought related events, document existing water quality and methods to improve that water quality, conserve and enhance habitat and detail how efforts related to land use planning will be coordinated with water resources planning. In addition to providing written documentation of a region’s water management goals and implementation procedures, the development of a written plan is in satisfaction of the requirements of funding programs which are designed to assist in the implementation of policies and projects seeking to improve water management.
One of the principal purposes of the IRWMP is to provide a flexible water management system which takes into account the ever changing hydrologic and governance parameters within the Tule River Basin. These changes not only include periodic significant changes in cropping patterns, but also changes in water quality objectives, agricultural to urban development trends and regulatory and environmental changes impacting the quantities of available surface and groundwater supplies.
A.2 IRWM Plan Benefits
Water is a critical resource that is essential to the activities of every person, industry, ecosystem, and agency. For this reason, effective water management is indispensable. IRWM planning contributes to effective water management by bridging gaps between industry and governing agencies to develop cohesive, mutually beneficial solutions. Development and Implementation of an IRWMP provides multiple benefits to a region.
• Identifies regional water resources problems from a variety of stakeholder groups • Identifies strategies to address problems • Encourages communication and collaboration between neighboring land use agencies • Provides opportunities to develop diverse and integrated solutions to water resource problems • Establishes monitoring plans to measure progress • Makes a concerted effort to include the entire community in water resources planning, including Tribal and disadvantaged communities, through an inclusive planning process • Is updated regularly to reflect new water management issues
June 2018 A-1
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
A.3 2016 IRWM Grant Program Guidelines
The 2016 State Guidelines specify the requirements and the standards of review that must be included in the plan prior to the State’s acceptance and approval of the plan. The requirements under Proposition 1, the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, differ slightly from those in previous legislation. In addition to items required under previous legislation, Proposition 1 requires that an IRWMP address the following:
1. Region description a. Climate Change Impacts on Region.
2. Plan Objectives a. Adapting to changes in variability of runoff and recharge. b. Consider effects of sea level rise. c. Reducing energy consumption. d. Consider strategies adopted by CARB in its AB 32 Scoping Plan to meet IRWM plan objectives. e. Consider options for Carbon Sequestration and using renewable energy.
3. Resource Management Strategies a. Update according to California Water Plan 2013 version including sediment management, Outreach and engagement, and water and culture. b. Consider effects of climate change towards resources management strategies in the region.
4. Project Review Process a. Further details in chapter on climate change adaption (Section O – Climate Change). b. Reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions.
5. Plan Performance and Monitoring a. Specific benefits to critical water issues for Native American Tribal communities. b. Policies and procedures that promote adaptive management and adjustments to IRWM plan when deemed necessary.
6. Local Water Planning a. Process to incorporate stormwater resources plans per Water Code § 10562 (b)(7)(i.e. SB985). b. Incorporate management issues and climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies form local plans in to the IRWM Plan.
7. Local Land Use Planning a. Information sharing and collaboration with regional land use planning.
8. Stakeholder Involvement a. Outreach and opportunity to participate in the IRWM Plan. Specifically directed towards Native American Tribes.
June 2018 A-2
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
9. Climate Change a. Vulnerability evaluation must be equivalent to vulnerability assessment in the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning, Section 4 and Appendix B. b. List of prioritized vulnerabilities including feasibility of RWMG to address the vulnerability. c. Adapting to changes in variability of runoff and recharge. d. Areas served by Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta of other costal aquifers must consider effects of seal level rise on water supply conditions and identify adaption measures.
A.3.1 Meeting the 2016 IRWM Plan Guideline Requirements
This document was developed in order to meet all requirements identified in the 2016 IRWMP State Guidelines. The sections of this document are intended to be highly integrated, thus the requirements are addressed in several sections throughout the document. However the following table (Table A-1) summarizes these requirements and identifies where they are most specifically addressed in the IRWMP.
Table A-1: Summary of IRWMP Requirements
Requirement Section Page RWMG Responsible for Development and B B-2 Implementation of Plan. RWMG and Individual Project Proponents. B B-1 IRWM Governance Structure. • Public Outreach and Involvement. • Effective decision making. • Access and Opportunity for participation in IRWM. • Effective Communication (internal and Governance external). • Long term implementation of the IRWM B B-2 Plan. • Coordination with neighboring IRWM groups and State/Federal agencies. • Collaborative Process to establish plan objectives. • Process for changes to IRWM Plan. • Updating or amending the IRWM Plan. Watershed Description C C-4 Internal boundaries C C-14, C-17 Water Supplies and Demand (20 year min. planning D D-13 horizon) Region Description Current and future water quality conditions. C C-18 Social and cultural makeup of region. C C-28 Water related objectives and conflicts. E E-1, E-6 IRWM regional boundary (explanation). C C-1 Climate Change Impacts on Region. O O-3 Objectives Describe process used to develop objectives E E-1
June 2018 A-3
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
Requirement Section Page RWMG’s must consider the objectives in the E-3, appropriate basin plan or plans and strategies to E E-5 meet applicable water quality Standards Identify quantitative or qualitative metrics and E E-12 measurable objectives Explain how objectives are prioritized or reason why E E-14 objectives are not prioritized Adapting to changes in variability of runoff and E E-9 recharge. Consider effects of sea level rise. E E-9 Reducing energy consumption. E-10, E E-11 Consider strategies adopted by CARB in its AB 32 E E-10, E-12 Scoping Plan to meet IRWM plan objectives. Consider options for Carbon Sequestration and E, E-9 – E-11 using renewable energy. Identify RMS incorporated in the IRWM Plan: F-1 – F-22 Consider all California Water Plan RMS Criteria. Demonstrate effects of climate change factor in to F F-3 – F-22 resource management. Resource Reducing energy consumption. F F-7 – F-8 Management Update according to California Water Plan 2013 Strategies F-11, F-12, version including sediment management, Outreach F F-21 and engagement, and water and culture. Address which RMS will be implemented in F F-23 achieving IRWM Plan Objectives Integration Process to develop and foster integration. Procedures for submitting a project to the RWMG. G G-2 Procedures for reviewing projects to include in the IRWM Plan. • How Project contributes to IRWM plan objectives. • How project is related to resource management strategies. • Technical feasibility of project. • Specific Benefits to Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) water issues (water supply or quality). Project Review • Environmental justice (EJ) considerations. G, Process G-1 – G-4 • Project costs and financing. Appendix H • Economic feasibility. • Project Status. • Strategic considerations for IRWM Plan Implementation. • Contribution of project to effects of climate change. • Contribution of project to reducing CHG emissions. • Whether project proponent has adopted IRWM Plan.
June 2018 A-4
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
Requirement Section Page • How project will reduce reliance on Sacramento- San Joaquin Water Supply (if applicable). Climate Change Considerations • Effects of climate change on region/ whether adaptions to water management system are necessary. • Contribution of project to adapting to identified system vulnerabilities to climate change effects on region. • Changes in amount, intensity, timing, quality, and variability of runoff and G, recharge. G-5 Appendix H • Effects of SLR on water supply conditions, identify suitable adaption measures. • Contribution of project to reducing GHG emissions compared to project alternatives. • Projects ability to reduce GHG emissions to IRWM Region over 20 year plan horizon. • Reduce energy consumption (especially energy embedded in water use). Procedures for displaying list of approved projects. G G-6 Discussion of potential impacts and benefits of Plan implementation. • Within IRWM Region. Impact and Benefit H H-1 – H-6 • Between IRWM Region. • To DAC, EJ concerns, and Native American Tribal communities. IRWM plan performance measures. I I-2 Monitoring Methods of RWMG’s ability to meet I I-2 objectives/ implement projects in IRWM plan. Plan Performance Specific benefits to critical water issues for Native I I-4 and Monitoring American Tribal communities. Policies and procedures that promote adaptive management and adjustments to IRWM plan when I I-1 deemed necessary. Process of data collection, storage, and Data Management dissemination to participants, stakeholders, public, J J-2 – J-8 and the state. Plan for financing/ implementation of identified K K-1 projects and programs. Financing for implementation of IRWM Plan. • List of known and potential funding Finance sources, programs, grant opportunities. • List of funding mechanisms including; K K-1 – K-4 water enterprise funds, rate structures, and private financing options for IRWM plan projects
June 2018 A-5
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
Requirement Section Page • How operation and maintenance costs for IRWM Plan projects will be paid for. Documentation of data/ technical analysis used in Technical Analysis L L-1 development of the plan. Discuss how IRWM Plan relates to planning documents and programs established by local M M-3 agencies. Dynamics between IRWM Plan and local planning M M-3 Relation to Local documents. Water Planning Incorporation of water management issues and climate change adaption and mitigation strategies M M-6 from local plans into the IRWM Plan. Process to incorporate stormwater resources plans M M-5 per Water Code § 10562 (b)(7)(i.e. SB985). Relationship between local land use planning, regional water issues, and water management M M-1 objectives. Plan for collaborative relationship between land use M M-1 planners and water managers. Demonstrate information sharing and collaboration Relation to Local with regional land use planning in order to manage Land Use Planning multiple water demands throughout the state, N N-6 adapt water management systems to climate change, and potentially offset climate change impacts to water supply in California. Information sharing and collaboration with regional N N-3 land use planning. Public Outreach process to promote participation in IRWM Plan development and implementation with stakeholders/ agencies including the following: • Native American Tribes • Wholesale and retail water purveyors • Wastewater agencies • Flood control agencies • Municipal and county governments and special districts N N-2 • Electrical corporations Stakeholder • Self-supplied water users Involvement • Environmental stewardship organizations • community organizations • Industrial organizations • State, federal, and regional agencies or universities • DAC members Process to identify, inform, invite, and involve B B-3 stakeholder groups in the IRWM process. How RWMG will endeavor to involve DACs in the N N-2 IRWM planning effort.
June 2018 A-6
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
Requirement Section Page Decision making process including IRWM committees, roles, or positions that stakeholders B B-3 can occupy. Necessity of stakeholder involvement to address objectives and resources management strategies of N N-1 the IRWM plan. Discussion on Collaborative process of groups listed B N-1 – N-7 above in IRWM Process. Outreach and opportunity to participate in the IRWM Plan. Specifically directed towards Native N N-3 American Tribes. Process to coordinate water management projects and activates of participation local agencies and N N-1 local stakeholders to avoid conflicts and promote efficiencies. Cooperation and coordination with neighboring IRWM Group efforts to address conflicts or similar N N-3 Coordination goals. Identification of areas where a State agency or other may be able to assist in communication, cooperation, or implementation of IRWM Plan N N-5 components, processes, and projects or where State or federal regulatory decisions are required before implementing the projects. Address adaption to effects of climate change O O-14 Mitigation of GHG emissions E, G, P O-16 Address climate change in multiple various IRWM O O-1–O-16 Plan components along with general discussion Vulnerability evaluation must be equivalent to vulnerability assessment in the Climate Change O-7 O Handbook for Regional Water Planning, Section 4 and A Climate Change List of prioritized vulnerabilities including feasibility O O-13 of RWMG to address the vulnerability. Adapting to changes in variability of runoff and O O-14 recharge. Areas served by Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta or other costal aquifers must consider effects of sea O O-6, O-15 level rise on water supply conditions and identify adaption measures.
A.3.2 Addressing Comments from 2015 IRWMP Submission.
A previous IRWMP was submitted in November of 2015 for this IRWM planning area. It was found that the plan was consistent with the 2012 IRWMP Guidelines, however it was inconsistent with the new 2016 IRWM Guidelines. This document aims to improve upon the previous IRWMP submission and comply with all applicable legislation regarding regional water management planning.
June 2018 A-7
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
A number of comments were made by the California Department of Water Resources during the previous IRWMP review process which identified the document’s shortcomings. The following table iterates these comments, summarizes how they are addressed in the document, and identifies where they are addressed.
Table A-2: Summary of Improvement from Previous IRWMP Submission
DWR Comment How Comment is Addressed Section Page Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget identifies ways to reduce dependence on the Delta, including No description in the IRWM plan to conjunctive use practices, expanding surface C-13, reduce dependence on the Delta water storage, and expanding policies to C, D D-16 supply regionally was found. promote efficient water use. This is also discussed in Section C, which describes how IRWMP objectives support efforts to reduce dependence on the Delta. Regional water supplies and demands were A 20-year analysis of the regions predicted through 2040. This analysis was water supply and demand was not D D-13 based on predicted population growth, crop presented. trends, and climate change impacts. The cultural, social, and economic profile of No information was found regarding the is discussed in Section C – Region cultural makeup and there is no text Description. The Agricultural, Latino, and regarding tribal community’s water Tribal communities were found to be the challenges. However, there is a C 28 most distinguishing cultural influences description of the rural and within the planning area. The Section also disadvantaged communities and describes each group’s primary goals and their water supply challenges. challenges related to water. Impacts and benefits to tribes were not found in the IRWM plan. The The process by which projects will be only tribal reference is the Santa evaluated based on their benefits and H H-6 Rosa Tachi Tribe as a member of the impacts to tribal communities is described in IRWMP Stakeholders Advisory section H – Benefits and Impacts. group. Quality Assurance and Quality Control Information regarding QA/QC Measures were developed to increase measures was not found in the J J-7 consistency regarding data management IRWM plan. and collection. The certainty and longevity of program-level K-1 No information on the certainty and and project-level funding sources is K - longevity of the plan was found. evaluated in Section K – Financing K-3 Strategies. No explanation of how O&M will be Project proponents are required to identify covered was found. O&M is listed as funding opportunities for project operation I I-5 an item in the minimum project and maintenance costs as a part of the monitoring element list. project Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
June 2018 A-8
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section A – Introduction
A.4 Point of Contact
Questions and comments on this IRWM Plan can be directed to:
David Duda, AICP (805) 904-4394 [email protected]
David De Groot, PE (559) 802-3052 [email protected]
Molly McDonnel, Assistant Planner (805) 904-4394 [email protected]
4-Creeks, Inc. P.O. Box 7593 Visalia, CA 93291
June 2018 A-9
Section B Governance, Stakeholder Involvement and Outreach
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
Section B – Governance, Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
B.1 Introduction
This section summarizes the Tule River Basin Region governance structure and the stakeholder involvement and outreach process. Per the 2016 California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Guidelines, hereinafter referred to as the “State IRWM Guidelines” or “State Guidelines”, the governance structure serves to define the processes, structures, and organizational traditions that determine how power is exercised, how stakeholders are involved in IRWM Plan development, how decisions are made, and how the IRWM Plan is updated over time. This section also provides discussion of:
• State IRWM Guidelines: Governance and Stakeholder Involvement Standards • IRWM Program Participants, including the Regional Water Management Group (RWMG), Lead Agency, Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC), Implementation Affiliates, and Interested Stakeholders • IRWM Organizational Structure, including governance, and decision-making processes • Stakeholder involvement, memorandum of understanding, and public outreach processes • Long-term implementation of the IRWM Plan, including the steps for updating and adopting the plan
B.1.1 State IRWM Guidelines: Governance and Stakeholder Involvement Standards
The 2016 IRWM Program Guidelines (State Guidelines) provided the lead document for the approach and content required for the Region’s IRWM Plan. These guidelines reflect current legislation impacting what should be included in IRWM Plans throughout the state of California. The Guidelines’ IRWM Plan Standards discuss specific elements that must be part of an IRWM Plan, and are included in the IRWM Plan requirement tables located in Appendix B – State Requirement tables.
B.1.2 IRWM Program Participants
While the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority (DCTRA) has taken the initial lead role for many years in Tule River Basin water management related activities, including participation in the joint Kaweah River Basins/Tule River Basin IRWM Stakeholder Advisory Group, a number of other entities that manage water have expressed interest in being a member of Tule River IRWM Group. They have done so through participation in joint water management activities, with participation of the majority of the entities taking place prior to any external funding project activities occurring related to IRWM activities.
The active participants of the Tule River IRWM Group currently include the County of Tulare, the Lower Tule River Irrigation District, the City of Porterville, the Pixley Irrigation District, the Porterville Irrigation
June 2018 B-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
District, the Saucelito Irrigation District, the Terra Bella Irrigation District, the Tea Pot Dome Water District, the Vandalia Water District, the Angiola Water District, and the Deer Creek Storm Water District. Additional participants include the various Community Service Districts, Public Utility Districts, Tulare County Flood Control District, Pioneer Water Company, and the Tule River Association. The Tule River Basin has prepared a Memorandum of Understanding for purposes of formally developing the IRWM Regional Water Management Group (RWMG).
A planning process of approximately five years in length has occurred, coordinating each of the entities noted above, along with interested parties from a multiple number of disciplines. These have included representatives from Self-Help Enterprises, private non-profit groups representing disadvantaged communities, including the Community Water Center, Tulare Basin Wildlife Wetlands Partners and representatives of multiple agencies of jurisdiction from both the Federal and State levels. The representatives have formed an advisory group which has worked through the processes of governance, project submittal, project scoring, development of plan goals and objectives and defining purpose and needs. Agreement has been reached amongst all participants, on a consensus basis, with respect to the critical foundation issues related to the IRWM process.
B.2. IRWM Organizational Structure
B.2.1 Governance Structure
The Deer Creek and Tule River Authority (DCTRA) is a joint powers authority covering approximately 289,448 acres in the County of Tulare. To date, DCTRA has acted as the lead agency in the coordinated management of water resources available to the Tule River Basin, particularly as they have applied to groundwater resources, droughts, and flood and storm waters control. Joining together with multiple agencies for management of pre-1914 water rights purposes, Central Valley Project water, groundwater management and development of a formalized Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) the DCTRA member entities have directed water management activities undertaken by the cooperating agencies within the Tule River Basin. Joining together with other agencies with similar goals, the DCTRA has provided formal notice to the public and agencies of jurisdiction of the preparation of an IRWMP. Based on the approval of the outcome of the Regional Acceptance Process by the Department of Water Resources of the State of California, this IRWMP has been prepared in parallel to a plan for the Kaweah River Basin with the governing bodies of the two IRWM areas electing to share a common Stakeholders Advisory Group.
Acting as the lead agency for a coordinated group of participants with specific proposed water management projects, the DCTRA has executed a contract for the development of this IRWMP, in draft status. It is the intent of this IRWMP to document, in detail, all of the existing relationships, policies, procedures and agreements which have both been historically in place, as well as in place at the time of the submission of this IRWMP to DWR for acceptance through the Plan Review Process of said agency.
The governance of this IRWMP initially resided with the Board of Directors of the DCTRA. The Board of Directors is comprised of an elected official from each of the member entities. The Directors are in office until their successors are selected. Actions taken by the governing Board of the DCTRA are done in conjunction with input from the Stakeholders Advisory Group, as well as from the entities which are
June 2018 B-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
signatory to the joint powers agreement. The original agreement was dated February 25, 1994, with subsequent amendments. A copy of these documents is presented in Appendix C.
As a joint powers authority of public agencies within the State of California, the business of the DCTRA is conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Brown Act wherein specific notice of meetings, topics to be discussed and actions proposed to be taken are contained in a published agenda and conducted in open session which is subject to public comment during a general comment period, as well as when a particular item is specifically taken up by the Board of Directors. Rules and procedures have been developed for conduct of the public and input from the public and interested parties by the DCTRA. Meetings of the Board of Directors are held on a regular quarterly basis, at a minimum, in a facility which is fully compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act standards.
Minutes of prior meetings are available to the public, upon request, as well as relevant documents pursuant to the DCTRA document request process. The governance of the Tule River Basin IRWMP will transfer from the DCTRA to the parties identified within the Tule River Basin MOU once the Tule River Basin IRWM Group executes the MOU and has the initial organizational meeting.
Actions Flow of IRWM Plan
Lead Agency Decisions Lead Agency and Coordination with DCTRA Board DWR/State DWR of Directors
Recommendations for RWM Group Joint Powers the Region to DCTRA Governing Agreement Board of Directors Board Entities
Evaluates projects / Stakeholders programs, technical Advisory input Group
Provides projects, Implementation Interested programs, and MOU Entities technical support Affiliates Stakeholders
Figure B-1. IRWM Program Governance Structure
June 2018 B-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
B.2.2 Stakeholders Advisory Group
As a part of the initial effort to expand the outreach efforts related to IRWM planning, the Tule River Basin Stakeholders Advisory Group was expanded to include a number of parties specifically invited to participate in the water management planning efforts within the Tule River Basins. A number of urban purveyors who had historically not participated in the planning efforts were invited, as well as a number of stakeholders and representatives of disadvantaged community areas and rural hamlet areas, underserved from the perspective of both adequate water supply and inadequate water quality. The group was also expanded to include the County of Tulare, which had historically participated from a flood control standpoint, but parties were added to specifically address public health concerns, including well construction and well abandonment.
B.2.3 Memorandum of Understanding
The Tule River Basin, during discussions with a stakeholder’s group, identified steps to formally develop a Memorandum of Understanding leading to an IRWMP for the Tule River Basin and addressing what form of governance a Regional Water Management Group would be based on. For the interim period, it has been determined to leave the plan organization with DCTRA as the lead and to add additional parties to the effort utilizing a Memorandum of Understanding, which has been drafted and provided to additional parties. The number of participants to the Memorandum of Understanding has yet to be determined, but current interested parties outside of the DCTRA member entities expressing interest include:
• County of Tulare • City of Porterville • Poplar Community Service District • Tipton Community Services District • Woodville Public Utility District • Pixley Public Utility District • Alpaugh Irrigation District • Alpaugh Community Services District • Allensworth Community Services District • Deer Creek Storm Water District • Angiola Water District
B.2.4 Notice of Intent to Prepare the IRWM Plan (Blanks appeared in original draft)
Notice and Hearing on Intent to Prepare an Integrated Water Management Plan On ______, 20__ a Notice of Public Hearing was published in the ______by a Regional Water Management Group, formed pursuant to California Water code Section 10539. The aforementioned Notice of Public Hearing states that a public hearing will be held to consider whether or not the aforementioned entities would “prepare an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan.” As noticed, the public hearing was held on ______. This IRWM Plan for the Tule River Basin has been prepared pursuant to said notice.
June 2018 B-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
B.2.5 Notice of Intent to Adopt the IRWM Plan
On ______, 2018, and ______, 2018, a Notice of Intent to Adopt an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan was published in the ______. It provided notice that “the Regional Water Management Group comprised of the member units, less the Stone Corral Irrigation District, of the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority” would hold a public hearing on ______, 2018, regarding “their intent to adopt an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Tule River Basin.” The Notice stated that “the public may comment on the proposed plan during the public hearing.” A copy of the Certificate of Publication of the aforementioned Notice of Intent to Adopt an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan is attached hereto as Appendix XXX. The public meeting was held on ______, 2015, as noticed. A copy of a document memorializing the decision of the Regional Water Management Group is attached hereto as Appendix XXX.
B.3 Long Term Implementation of the IRWM Plan
B.3.1 Governance
As the primary body involved with the governance of the Plan, the RWM Group as described in the Memorandum of Understanding, dated ______, a copy of which is attached as Appendix A (“MOU”), shall be led by a governing board (“RWM Group Governing Board”) composed of one designated primary representative from each of the parties (individually “Party” and collectively “Parties”) to the MOU, one designated member from the Tule River Basin RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group, together with those who may hereafter be added as members of the RWM Group by any subsequent majority vote of the Parties. Each Party shall also designate an alternate representative to attend meetings of the RWM Group Governing Board when the designated primary representative is unable to do so and in such situations the alternate representative shall represent the Party. The Chair of the RWM Group Governing Board shall be elected for a two (2) year term by the members of the RWM Group Governing Board from among its members, the members shall also elect a Vice Chair, which will also have the same two-year term.
B.3.2 Stakeholder Advisory Group
A Tule River Basin Stakeholder Advisory Group has participated extensively in many of the details involving the formation of the Plan. The Tule River Basin RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group has elected from among its members a Chair and a Vice Chair to conduct the meetings of the RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group. The Tule River Basin RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group shall appoint one (1) individual and one (1) alternate to serve on the Tule River Basin RWM Group Governing Board for a term of two (2) years. Actions of the RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group shall be by majority vote of those present at a duly called and noticed meeting and shall be limited to action to advise the RWM Group Governing Board and to appoint members to such Board in the manner provided in the following paragraph.
June 2018 B-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
B.3.3 Actions of the RWM Group Governing Board
Actions requiring the approval of the RWM Group Governing Board shall only be taken after approval of a majority of the Parties during a duly noticed meeting of the RWM Group Governing Board with a quorum present. The quorum for the RWM Group Governing Board to conduct a valid meeting is a majority of the parties to the Memorandum of Understanding dated ______. The aforementioned actions include how formal changes to the Plan will be performed. Before taking any action to direct the performance of formal changes to the Plan, the RWM Group Governing Board shall hold a public hearing and consider any and all advice from the RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group and comments from other members of the public.
B.3.4 Meetings
All meetings of the RWM Group Governing Board or the RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group may be called by the Chair of the respective group or any two members of the group by providing the notice of such meeting as required by law. Meetings of either shall be held in the Board Room at the office of the Lower Tule River Irrigation District, located at 357 Olive Avenue, Tipton, California, or other meeting place designated by the Authority, unless the RWM Group Governing Board or the RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group takes action to hold one or more of its meetings at a different location. All meetings of the RWM Group Governing Board and the RWM Stakeholder Advisory Group shall be in compliance with the requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act found in California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq.
B.3.5 Updating or Amending the IRWM Plan
Plan Review
Whenever the RWM Group Governing Board deems it necessary to keep the Plan current, but not less frequently than four (4) years after the date of the adoption of the Plan and every five (5) years thereafter, the Chair of the RWM Group Governing Board shall appoint individuals who shall constitute a committee (“Plan Review Committee”) composed of an equal number of members of the RWM Group Governing Board and the RWM Stakeholders Advisory Group, which shall be tasked with reviewing the Plan and recommending Plan updates or amendments (‘amendments”) to the RWM Group Governing Board. The Plan Review Committee shall elect a Chair and an alternate Chair.
Each Plan Review Committee shall complete its review and make its recommendations to the RWM Group Governing Board within one (1) year after its formation. The Chair of the Plan Review Committee shall set the frequency of the meetings and call as many meetings as he or she deems necessary to timely complete its assigned tasks. The Plan Review Committee shall obtain the permission of the RWM Group Governing Board to employ consultants to assist it in reviewing the Plan and in preparing any recommended amendments.
June 2018 B-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
Interim Change
The Plan shall be subject to adaptive management processes in order to timely respond to changing conditions. A minor process, organizational, or water management change (“Interim Change”) that occurs relatively frequently may be made informally and without formal action of the RWM Group Governing Board pending the next scheduled meeting of the RWM Governing Board. The RWM Stakeholders Group may take action to recommend an Interim Change. Either staff of a Party or the RWM Stakeholders Group may ask the RWM Group Governing Board to determine whether a minor process, organizational, or water management change constitutes an Interim Change.
Formal Plan Changes
Given that the Board of Directors of the DCTRA has chosen to select an interval for review and update of other plans created and maintained under the jurisdiction of the DCTRA, action to establish a review and update period can be assumed to be taken soon for this IRWMP. At the time of the establishment of that interval, the update format policy will also be established by the Board of Directors. Looking again to existing plan update policies, formal plan updates are usually accompanied with a complete replacement of the plan document. It has been proven in other cases to not be as efficient to issue amendment additions to critical plans, thus causing a party utilizing the particular plan to circuit back and forth between an auxiliary amendment documents and the principal plan document. The authority to affect this policy resides currently with the DCTRA Board of Directors.
Consideration of Recommendations by the Plan Review Committee
The Plan Review Committee shall provide its recommendation to the RWM Group Governing Board, which shall review the same and consider whether to adopt the recommendation in whole, in part or not at all. The RWM Group Governing Board may consider other amendments to the Plan not recommended by the Plan Review Committee.
Notice and Hearing on Intention to Adopt Amendments to Plan
If the RWM Group Governing Board decides that it will consider adopting amendments to the Plan, it shall publish notice of its intention to amend the Plan in accordance with California Government Code Section 6066.
Adoption of Amendments to Plan
After providing the notice required in paragraph above, the RWM Group Governing Board shall have a public meeting at which it may adopt amendments to the Plan. If it decides to adopt amendments to the Plan, the RWM Group Governing Board shall determine whether to adopt the amendments by amending the Plan or by adopting an amended or restated Plan.
June 2018 B-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
B.3.6 Outreach to DACs and Tribal Communities
Continuous outreach is considered to be a critical aspect of long term IRWMP implementation at both a project and programmatic level. Community Outreach will be conducted through a variety of outlets as projects and programs are proposed for integration into the IRWMP.
Outreach to Native American Tribal Communities will take place in accordance with AB 52, which requires consideration of Tribal cultural values in determination of project impacts and mitigation. Compliance with this legislation will include coordination with tribal group representatives during the CEQA process to ensure protection of cultural resources. Additional information regarding coordination with Native American Tribal Communities is presented in Section N – Planning Coordination.
Outreach to disadvantaged communities will take place through the Proposition 1 IRWM Disadvantaged Communities Involvement Program. This program provides funding to support a variety of activities intended to increase DAC involvement in water management programs. Eligible DAC Involvement activities, as identified by the Prop 1 DACI RFP, are noted in the table below. Information regarding consideration of DACs and Tribal Communities in project benefit/impact analysis is presented in Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts.
June 2018 B-8 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section B – Governance Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach
Table B-1. Eligible Prop 1 DAC Involvement Program Activities
General Examples of Activity Desired Outcome Activity Technical, financial or managerial assistance Service provider trainings, local that results in community staff that are able to Technical circuit rider programs to train support local water resource decision making, assistance water and wastewater staff gain knowledge, and retain technical skills within the Funding Area Needs assessments provide a better Surveys or meetings with Needs understanding of water management needs of community members to identify assessments the community to help direct resources and water management needs funding Project Planning activities, environmental Project development activities for future development compliance, or pre-construction implementation/construction funding activities engineering/design activities Site assessment that results in extensive Water quality assessments, knowledge gained by staff and DAC members Site median household income on specific water management needs, data, assessment surveys, data and mapping and development for future water-related activities project(s) DAC regional engagement Engagement activities should result in Engagement in coordinator role, DAC Advisory increased activity and roles of DACs in RWMG IRWM efforts Committee to RWMG, DAC decision making and increased participation in representatives in governance IRWM efforts Evaluation of existing governance Development or implementation of RWMG structures and related plan governance structures that ensure Governance financing efforts, assessments of participation in IRWM efforts regardless of the Structure the level of DAC involvement in ability to contribute financially to the IRWM decision making processes plan Public project meetings open to Outreach should result in increased Community community members, door-to- participation of DACs in project development outreach door outreach activities and IRWM planning activities Translation or interpretive Education and interpretive services should services for information sharing, result in the better understanding by Education water education campaigns for community members of their water community members, education management needs for RWMGs on DAC needs Facilitation services should result in Facilitated RWMG meetings, community participation and stakeholders Facilitation facilitated project development being able to resolve or overcome obstacles in meetings communicating water management needs Development of Funding Area- IRWM Plan DAC-related changes should result Enhancement wide DAC plan to be utilized as a in tangible changes to the IRWM plan that of DAC aspects unified approach for all IRWM support the IRWM’s understanding of their in IRWM Plans plans DAC water management needs in the region
June 2018 B-9
Section C Region Description
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Section C - Region Description
C.1 Introduction
This purpose of this section is to discuss the Tule River Basin’s relevance as an IRWM Planning area, and to provide background on the physical, cultural, social, and economic characteristics of the region.
This section begins with a discussion of the region’s environmental resources, which were broken down into three sections: Water Resources, Biological Resources, and Geologic Conditions. These region-specific characteristics serve as the foundation for regional water planning.
Following a discussion of the region’s environmental resources is an examination of existing water management systems, including major infrastructure, wastewater service providers, flood control districts, and land use agencies. The existing network of entities responsible for water management within the IRWMP region provides the framework on which IRWMP objectives and projects are formed.
This section then examines the existing water quality conditions within the region, and discusses potential sources of contamination. This section includes a discussion on nitrate, arsenic, perchlorate, and hexavalent chromium as required by the 2016 IRWM Guidelines.
The section concludes with a summary of the cultural, social, and economic profile of the region. This information is used to develop and prioritize goals, objectives, and IRWMP projects and determine the feasibility of IRWMP implementation.
C.2 Tule River Basin Relevance as an IRWM Planning Area
The boundaries of this IRWM planning area were determined based on existing governance and the boundaries of adjacent IRWM planning areas.
The northern and eastern IRWMP boundary lines generally follow the northern and eastern DCTRA boundary lines (See Figure C-1), which are generally administrative and political in nature. Although the Tule Sub-basin boundaries are somewhat similar to the DCTRA boundaries, DCTRA boundaries fall along township lines, county lines, and adjacent surface water distribution entity boundaries. For the most part, they do not have hydrogeologic significance.
The southern and western IRWMP boundary lines extend past the DCTRA boundaries and were developed to eliminate gaps in IRWM planning areas and ensure adequate coverage for all areas desiring such coverage.
June 2018 C-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
June 2018 C-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.3 Water Resources
A thorough water budget accounting of groundwater, including other water supplies, is provided in Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget.
C.3.1 Tule Subbasin
The Tule Sub-basin is located in the southern portion of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. This portion of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin consists of seven sub-basins. These are:
• Kings • Westside • Kaweah • Tulare Lake • Pleasant Valley • Kern • Tule
The Tule sub-basin is the only source of groundwater supply within the IRWM planning area. A 2009 Water Supply Evaluation Report prepared for the 2030 Tulare County General Plan identified the sub-basin’s safe yield at 235,400 acre-feet per year. The Tule sub-basin has a surface area is approximately 733 square miles and is generally bounded by the northern boundaries of the Lower Tule Irrigation District and Porterville Irrigation District to the north, the Tulare-Kern county line to the south, the edge of the alluvium and crystalline bedrock of the Sierra Nevada foothills to the east, and the Tulare County line to the west.
Figure C-2. Regional Subbasin Boundaries.
June 2018 C-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.3.2 Tule River Watershed
The IRWM Planning area receives the majority of its surface water from snowmelt in the Tule River Watershed. The watershed extends up to a maximum elevation of 9,300 feet into the Sierra Nevada east of Porterville and much of the precipitation occurs as snowmelt. The Tule River consists of three forks, North, Middle, and South. The North Fork and Middle Fork merge just north of Springville, and then merge with the South Fork at Lake Success. The water is then released from Success Dam and flows west through Porterville. The river historically emptied into Tulare Lake, however the water is now diverted for agricultural use.
C.3.3 Ancillary Watersheds
While the Tule River and its distributaries are the dominant water feature in the DCTRA IRWM planning area the IRWM planning area is influenced and impacted by other watersheds. A separate watershed is located on each side of the Tule River watershed. The Deer Creek watershed is located such that the fetch is exclusively in a rainfall area with snowfall typically not a regular occurrence and when occurring, snowfall is limited to the upper several hundred feet of the tops of the watersheds. At times, the Kaweah River watershed, a tributary of the Tule River develops sufficient flow that the flows of said River are added to the flows of Tule River and discharge to the historic Tulare Lake Bed area while combined for State Water rights management purposes, each river remains separate for purposes of flow scheduling and apportionment. Flows occurring in Deer Creek are likewise managed separately, but according to the type of water right and senior/junior priority based on post-1914 appropriative license procedure.
C.4 Biological Resources
This section summarizes the environmental resources within the Tule River Basin IRWM Plan Region. These resources are reliant on the quality and availability of water within the Region.
C.4.1 Aquatic Sensitive Species
As the Tule River system is an ephemeral system, no fishery of any type exists in the river system below Success Dam. As the eastern boundary of the DCTRA IRWMP begins near Success Dam, aquatic species are limited to invertebrates inhabiting the River system and the manmade water distribution systems existing on the valley floor. As a part of the DCTRA’s prior management of the requirements of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program, routine samples have been taken of sediments throughout the IRWMP area and tested for toxicity. While these invertebrate species can tolerate some degree of physical disturbance, they have a very low tolerance for chemical molestation which has generated the need for periodic toxicity testing.
Throughout the entire historical test period extending from July, 2004 to date, a single location within the entire River distributary system has been identified as to having had a toxicity problem effecting invertebrates. It has been tentatively determined that the toxicity occurrence was not as a result of irrigated agriculture operations, but rather roadside herbicide application programs related to the County of Tulare. A study has been submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board with respect to the source(s) of the contamination.
June 2018 C-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.4.2 Freshwater Habitats
As previously noted, the climate characteristics of the DCTRA IRWMP area are semi-arid. This fact, coupled with the ephemeral stream nature of the Tule River system, has led to freshwater habitats being virtually non-existant. No significant sand, gravel or hard rock mine areas in their reclamation phase exist to provide the most significant freshwater habitat.
The second form of freshwater habitat which exists within the DCTRA IRWMP area is that related to golf course water hazards. The acreage of these hazards is very small and in some cases, these hazards are dried up in all but wet years due to the cost of the water to place in the hazards, as well as being a Best Management Practice as delineated in a particular area’s Urban Water Management Plan.
C.4.3 Areas of Special Biological Significance
A few areas of special biological significance exist within the DCTRA IRWMP area. Notably amongst these is the DCTRA Ponding Basin Area managed by DCTRA. This area is a restoration of an element of the Pacific Flyway for migratory waterfowl. Complimenting that area is the Pixley National Wildlife Management Area owned and managed by the United States. It is a remnant of the dry, upland habitat which existed in the area. It is home to the blunt nosed leopard lizard, the Tipton Kangaroo rat and the giant garter snake. The area is a critical element in the recovery plan developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for each one of those species.
The final example of an area biological significance is the 725 acre J.K. Herbert Wetlands Prairie which is located south of the Tulare-Lindsay Highway owned and maintained by the Sequoia Riverlands Trust. This area is described as a Wetland Prairie Grassland Habitat which also contains, in the southeastern portion, a number of vernal pools. This area is just to the north of the north boundary of the DCTRA IRWMP Planning area.
C.5 Geologic Resources
The rocks that crop out in the DCTRA IRWMP planning area include a basement complex of pre-Tertiary age consisting of consolidated metamorphic and igneous rocks and unconsolidated deposits of Pliocene, Pleistocene and recent age, all of which contain fresh water. Consolidated marine rocks of Pliocene age and older do not crop out in this area, but are penetrated by wells in the subsurface. Because the water from these wells generally is brackish or salty, the marine rocks are not considered as part of the freshwater reservoir and constitute the effective base of fresh water or, what is commonly referred to, as permeable sediments. Most of the groundwater pumped within the DCTRA IRWMP area is from the unconsolidated deposits. Geologic units that affect the occurrence and movement of groundwater in the DCTRA IRWMP planning area are generally classified and described as follows:
1. Basement Rocks: Non-water bearing granitic and metamorphic rocks; 2. Marine Rocks: Non-water bearing marine sediments including the San Joaquin Formation; 3. Unconsolidated Deposits: Non-marine, water bearing material comprised of the Tulare Formation and equivalent units;
June 2018 C-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
4. Alluvial Deposits: Coarse-grained, water bearing alluvial fan and stream deposits including older oxidized and reduced units and younger alluvium; 5. Lacustrine and Marsh Deposits: Fine-grain sediments representing a lake and marsh phase of equivalent continental and alluvial fan deposition.
C.5.1 Basement Complex
The basement complex of the pre-Tertiary age consists of metamorphic and igneous rocks. They underlie the Sierra Nevada and occur as resistant inliers in the alluvium and as linear ridges in the foothills east of the IRWMP planning area. In the subsurface, they slope steeply westward from the Sierra Nevada beneath the deposits of Cretaceous age and younger rocks that compose the valley fill. Information is in the Tule Basin Groundwater Model GIS database indicating the altitude above or below sea level at which bedrock (presumably basement complex) has been reported by drillers or interpreted from electric logs. Additional database information indicates escarpments that are interpreted as buried fault scarps associated with the Rocky Hill fault. West of the escarpments, the slope of the basement complex steepens. In the Tulare Lake area, an oiltest well failed to penetrate the basement complex at 14,642 feet below sea level (Smith, 1964).
The basement complex is at shallow depths in the Terra Bella, Strathmore and Porterville areas and in the intermontane valleys where it is penetrated by many water wells. In the Poplar, Tipton and Pixley areas, the basement complex forms a broad, gently westward-sloping shelf overlain by 100 to 1,000 feet of unconsolidated deposits.
C.5.2 Marine Rocks
Along the east border of the San Joaquin Valley, Tertiary rocks, mainly of marine origin, overlap the basement complex and underlie the unconsolidated deposits. Croft (1968) suggests this unit may locally include beds of continental origin in the upper part. Inside the IRWMP boundary, the marine rocks do not crop out. The Tertiary marine rocks have locally been penetrated by oil- and gas-test wells in localized areas of the east part of the planning area, range in age from Eocene to late Pliocene and consist of consolidated to semiconsolidated sandstone, siltstone and shale. They have traditionally been locally divided into several formations by geologist (Park and Weddle, 1959), but they generally contain brackish and saline connate or dilute connate water unsuitable for most uses.
C.5.3 Unconsolidated Deposits
The unconsolidated deposits in the IRWMP planning area are divided into several geologic units. In the Kettleman Hills, west of the DCTRA planning area, Woodring et al. (1940) divided the unconsolidated deposits into the Tulare Formation and into older and younger alluvium. The Tulare Formation in the Kettleman Hills overlies the upper Mya zone (Woodring et al., 1940, p. 13), a fossil horizon at the top of the San Joaquin Formation. The Mya zone is reported in well logs beneath Tulare Lake bed and is a prominent marker bed outside of the DCTRA that separates the marine rocks from overlying continental deposits. The base of the unconsolidated deposits is projected by electric log correlation from the upper Mya zone beneath Tulare Lake bed, eastward to the top of marine rocks. The unconsolidated deposits of
June 2018 C-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
this report are equivalent to the continental deposits from the Sierra Nevada of Klausing and Lohman (1964) and to the unconsolidated deposits as used by Hilton et al. (1963).
The unconsolidated deposits thicken from zero along the western front of the Sierra Nevada to a maximum of about 10,000 feet at the west boundary of the DCTRA planning area. The unconsolidated deposits are divided into three stratigraphic units: continental deposits, older alluvium and younger alluvium.
In the subsurface, the younger alluvium interfingers and/or grades laterally into the flood-basin deposits and into alluvium, undifferentiated. The older alluvium and continental deposits interfinger and/or grade laterally into the lacustrine and marsh deposits or into alluvium. In the subsurface, the older alluvium and continental deposits are also further subdivided into oxidized and reduced deposits on the basis of environment of deposition.
Unconsolidated deposits, which locally crop out at the IRWMP east boundary and extend beneath the valley floor, were eroded from the adjacent mountains, then transported by streams and mudflows and deposited in lakes, bogs, swamps or on alluvial fans. The lithologic and water-bearing characteristics of the deposits are dependent upon several controlling factors, which include 1) environment of deposition, 2) the type of rock in the source area and 3) competence (or energy) of the streams.
According to Davis et al. (1957), oxidized deposits generally represent subaerial deposition and reduced deposits generally represent subaqueous deposition. Oxidized deposits are red, yellow and brown, consist of gravel, sand, silt and clay and generally have well-developed soil profiles. Reduced deposits are blue, green or gray, calcareous, and generally are finer grained than oxidized deposits and commonly have a higher organic content than the oxidized deposits. In some cases, the separation between the oxidized and reduced deposits can be identified on well logs based on lithologic color. Such delineation can of course be highly subjective. The coarsest grained reduced deposits were laid down in a flood plan or deltaic environment bordering lakes and swamps. Because of a high water-table in some parts of the east side of the IRWMP planning area, the sediments have not been exposed to subaerial weathering agents. The finest grained reduced deposits were mapped as flood basin, lacustrine and marsh deposits.
The oxidized deposits underlie the older and younger alluvium and throughout most of the DCTRA, the oxidized deposits are 200 to 500 feet thick. Based on work by Croft (1968), a structural contour map of the approximate base of the oxidized deposits has been prepared and published.
The oxidized deposits consist mainly of deeply weathered, reddish brown, calcareous sandy slit and clay and can, in most well completion reports, be readily identified when present. Beds of coarse sand and gravel are rare, but where present, they commonly contain significant silt and clay. The highly oxidized character of the deposits is the result of deep and prolonged weathering. Many of the easily weathered minerals presumably have altered to clay and, as such, are poorly permeable.
C.5.4 Lacustrine and Marsh Deposits
The lacustrine and marsh deposits of Pliocene and Pleistocene age consist of bluegreen or gray gypsiferous silt, clay and fine sand that underlie the flood-basin deposits and conformably overlie the marine rocks of late Pliocene age. In the subsurface beneath parts of Tulare Lake bed, these beds extend to about 3,000 feet below land surface. Where the equivalent beds crop out in the Kettleman Hills on the west side of
June 2018 C-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
the valley, they were named the Tulare Formation by Anderson (1905, p. 181). The lacustrine beds and fossils of the Tulare Formation were mapped and described in detail by Woodring et al. (1940, p. 13-26) who considered the top of the Tulare Formation to be the uppermost deformed bed. Therefore, by this definition, all the deformed unconsolidated deposits would form the Tulare Formation.
In the subsurface around the margins of the Tulare Lake bed, the lacustrine and marsh deposits form several clay zones that interfinger with more permeable beds of the continental deposits, alluvium, undifferentiated and older alluvium. Because of contained fossils and stratigraphic relations to adjacent deposits, these clays are considered to be principally of lacustrine origin. Clay zones are generally indicated by characteristic curves on electric logs and thereby facilitate some areal correlations between adjacent logs as shown in hydrogeologic cross sections. Although as many as six (6) laterally continuous clay zones have locally been defined in the southern San Joaquin Valley, only the most prominent of these clay zones, known as the “E” Clay (or Corcoran Clay member) of the Tulare Formation, is found within the IRWMP boundaries. Clay deposits are nearly impermeable and yield little water to wells and that which is obtained is generally of poor chemical quality.
The E Clay is one of the largest confining bodies in the area and underlies about 1,000 square miles west of U.S. Highway 99. The beds were deposited in a lake that occupied the San Joaquin Valley trough and which varied from 10 to 40 miles in width and was more than 200 miles in length (Davis et al., 1957). The first wide-scale correlation of the Corcoran Clay was made by Frink and Kues (1954).
The E Clay extends from Tulare Lake bed to U.S. Highway 99. It is about 140 feet thick near Corcoran and the average thickness is about 75 feet. The deposits near Corcoran are probably the thickest section in the San Joaquin Valley.
C.5.5 Reduced Older Alluvium
As previously mentioned, the reduced older alluvium is a moderately permeable arkosic deposit that is not exposed in the IRWMP planning area. It overlies the continental deposits, interfingers with lacustrine and marsh deposits beneath Tulare Lake bed and interfingers with alluvium, undifferentiated, north of the Tulare Lake bed. Around the margin of Tulare Lake bed, the reduced older alluvium interfingers with lacustrine deposits.
The reduced older alluvium consists mainly of fine to coarse sand, silty sands and clays that were probably deposited in a flood plain or deltaic environment. Gravel that occurs in the oxidized older alluvium is generally absent. The deposits are sporadically cemented with calcium carbonate, according to logs of core holes made by geologists of the Bureau of Reclamation. Those descriptions imply, however, that the calcium carbonate is probably less abundant than in the underlying reduced continental deposits.
C.5.6 Oxidized Older Alluvium
The oxidized older alluvium unconformably overlies the continental deposits. The beds consist of fine to very coarse sand, gravel, silt and clay derived for the most part from granitic rocks of the Sierra Nevada. Beneath the channels of the Kaweah, Tule and Kings Rivers, electric logs indicate that the beds are very coarse. In the interfan areas, metamorphic rocks and older sedimentary units locally contributed to the
June 2018 C-8 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
deposits and, in those areas, the beds are probably not as coarse as the beds beneath the Kaweah, Tule and Kings Rivers. Fine-grained deposits occur in the channel of Elk Bayou.
East of U.S. Highway 99, the contact of the older alluvium with the underlying oxidized continental deposits is well defined in electric logs. Structure contours, based on electric log data, show the altitude above or below sea level of the base of the unit. The older alluvium thickens irregularly from east to west and probably has filled gorges cut by the ancient Tule River in the underlying oxidized continental deposits near Porterville. The base of the deposits occurs 195 feet below land surface near Poplar and declines to 430 feet below land surface near Tipton.
C.5.7 Younger Alluvium
Younger alluvium consists of gravelly sand, silty sand, silt and clay deposited along stream channels and laterally away from the channels in the westerly portion of the DCTRA. Younger alluvium is relatively thin locally, reaching a maximum depth below ground surface of perhaps 100 feet. Except in the extreme easterly portion of the IRWMP area, it is generally above the water table and does not constitute a major water-bearing unit.
Soils developed on younger alluvium show little or no profile development and are generally free of underlying clay subsoil or hardpan. Because percolation rates through the younger alluvium are moderate to high, this deposit serves as a permeable conveyance system for recharge to underlying water-bearing materials.
C.5.8 Geohydrology
In cooperation with the DWR, the member units of DCTRA measure, tabulate and publish water level data for hundreds of water wells. Records for some wells extend back to the 1920s with most records for wells included in the DCTRA’s groundwater monitoring program beginning in the 1950s. The quality of the data is considered excellent. From these data, changes in groundwater and storage can be estimated along with an analysis of water level conditions and trends within the DCTRA IRWM planning area.
A GIS database has been constructed, principally to be utilized in the operation of the DCTRA numeric groundwater model wherein calculations of storage changes and groundwater flow can be accomplished by integrating groundwater level elevation contour maps with specific yield data, aquifer properties and specific surface water delivery information by hydrologic unit area. The DCTRA IRWMP benefits from a long-term water level measurement program of key wells in the IRWM planning area. Information from the DCTRA participating agencies monitoring program is provided to DWR for use in preparation of spring, unconfined aquifer system contour maps which are a routine DWR publication. DCTRA maps are produced from the information, as well, including comparative data between selected years.
The water level database is posted both on the DWR DCTRA websites and allows downloading of compiled hydrographs of key wells in the DCTRA IRWMP area for purposes of graphical display and analysis
June 2018 C-9 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.6 Existing Water Management Systems
The following Table C-1 and Figure C-3 summarize the existing internal boundaries through which water management occurs in the IRWM planning area. These components are discussed in more detail below.
Table C-1. Existing Internal Boundaries
Local Watershed Water District Governments / Potable Water Suppliers (8-Digit HUC) Communities Ducor Irrigation District Ducor • Ducor Community Services District Teviston • Teviston Community Services District Pixely Irrigation District Pixley • Pixley Public Utility District Upper Deer- Terra Bella Irrigation District Terra Bella • Friends RV Park Upper White Rancho Terra Bella • Porterville Developmental Center • Akin Water Company • Beverly Grand Mutual Water Company • Big Stump Trailer Park • Central Mutual Water Company • East Plano Mutual Water Company • East Vandalia Water Company • Grandview Gardens Mutual Water Vandalia Irrigation District Company City of Porterville Service • Golden Key Apartments Area • Mullen Water Company City of Teapot Dome Irrigation • Porterville Trailer Park Porterville District • Shady Grove Mobile Home Park East Porterville • Shiloh Water Company • Sierra Mutual Water Company Upper Tule • Spiegelberg Water Company • Sunny Acres Water System • Tea Pot Dome Water Company • Alta Vista Mobile Home Park • California Water Service Company • Fairway Tract Mutual Water Company • LA Homeowners Water System Pioneer Water Company • Porterville Irrigation District Lakeside Trailer Park • Mt. View Duplexes • Woodville Farm Labor Center Woodville • Woodville Public Utility District Lower Tule River Irrigation Tipton • Tipton Community Services District District
• Poplar Community Services District Poplar Tulare-Buena • Williams Mutual Water Company Vista Lakes Angolia Water District Alpaugh Irrigation District Alpaugh • Alpaugh Community Services District
June 2018 C-10 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
June 2018 C-11 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.6.1 Major Infrastructure
This Section describes the major infrastructure that provides water throughout the Tule River Basin IRWM Plan Region. Many of the projects covered in this section have been presented above. Provided herein is a short description of the larger regional water-related infrastructure, their purpose, and capacity.
Lake Success
Success Reservoir is located on the Tule River about 6 miles east of the City of Porterville. Success Dam, completed in 1961 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), provides flood protection and irrigation water storage for downstream water rights holders. The earth fill dam is 142 feet high and has a gross pool elevation of 652.5 feet mean sea level (m.s.l.), originally providing 85,400 acre-feet of storage capacity. Success Reservoir inundated approximately 2,406 acres at gross pool, flooded nearly 3.5 miles of river and had a spillway design flood pool of 202,800 acre-feet.
The Southern California Edison Company and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company each owns and operates a small hydroelectric plant upstream from Success Dam. In addition, the Lower Tule River Irrigation District operates a 1.4-kilowatt hydroelectric power plant which was retrofitted to Success Dam in 1989.
Success Dam was authorized by the 1944 Flood Control Act. The total gross reservoir capacity at construction was 85,440 acre-feet with 700 acre-feet of dead storage 5,000 acre-feet to store sediment. When constructed, the spillway design inflow peak of Success Dam was 200,000 cfs with a spillway design outflow peak of 126,000 cfs.
Efforts have been underway for several years to increase both the flood control capability of the facility and the conservation storage volume.
The principal storage facility available to water rights holders within the DCTRA IRWMP area is Lake Success. Impounded by Success Dam, this facility allows for conservation storage beginning with a ramp up period in March of each year and extending to full storage by May 1. The entire reservoir storage is available for conservation purposes from that date until November 1 of each year. Beginning November 1, the flood control diagram goes into effect and storage operations are at the direction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Significant coordination exists between said entity and the water rights holders, along with officials representing the City of Porterville and landowners in the Tulare Lake bed.
Central Valley Project (CVP), Friant Division
In 1933-34, when the State of California could not find enough takers to buy revenue bonds to complete the California Central Valley Project Act, it went to Washington seeking assistance. The passage of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935 by the Congress put funding under Federal direction and construction under the USACOE. By order of the President, $20 million was transferred from the Emergency Relief Act Fund to the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), for construction of Friant Dam and other initial features on September 10, 1935. The President signed the Act later that year.
June 2018 C-12 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Between 1935 and 1940, the population of the San Joaquin Valley exploded: Tulare County increased by 38.4 percent, Kings County by 38.5 percent and Kern County by 63.6 percent. Reacting to a wartime demand, cotton became California’s outstanding crop by the mid- 1940s, displacing citrus. The lands of the Friant Division were no different, as cultivating and picking cotton drove each of the four counties’ economies. Almost a half-century later, by the 1990s, approximately 15,000 small farms, averaging 63 acres each, were spread throughout the Friant Division.
Estimated cost of the Friant Dam and Reservoir came in at $14 million, the Friant-Kern Canal came in at $26 million and the Madera Canal was $3 million. The Water Project Authority represented the State of California in negotiations with the Federal Government. In March, 1936, the Authority signed a cooperative agreement with the United States creating three (3) divisions, including Friant, for the Central Valley Project. Six (6) months later, the Authority approved Reclamation’s prospective location of the Friant Dam and the Bureau’s design of the dam and canals. Central Valley Project legislation was reauthorized as the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1937. Along with Friant Dam and the Friant-Kern and Madera Canals, initial major features authorized were Shasta and Keswick Dams, the Tracy Pumping Plant and the Delta-Mendota Canal. The amendment transferred a $12 million authorization from the 1935 Rivers and Harbors Act earmarked for flood control and navigation to Department of the Interior. More importantly, the 1937 Act placed the CVP under Reclamation law. Additional funding under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1940 allowed for improvement of certain rivers and harbors in the interest of national defense.
To capture and control the San Joaquin River, Reclamation, in the mid- 1930s, designed a straight, 319- foot high concrete gravity dam that would have impounded a half-million acre-feet of flows from the River. The first surveys for the Friant Dam commenced in November 1935 and studies of where to excavate for two (2) delivery canals followed in early 1936.
Because of the dual complexities of moving water from one watershed to another and diverting the natural flow of the San Joaquin, a number of water rights claims had to be settled before construction progressed. California water law provides for riparian rights entitling a land owner on a stream to the full beneficial use of the stream’s natural flow. Reclamation could not divert water away from a stream until it settled the question of downstream water rights. Reclamation settled negotiations with the holders of the largest water rights claims on the San Joaquin in the spring of 1939.
Friant Dam was located on the San Joaquin River, 25 miles northeast of Fresno, California. Completed in 1942, the dam is a concrete gravity structure, 319 feet high, with a crest length of 3,488 feet. The dam controls the San Joaquin River flows, provides downstream releases to meet requirements above Mendota Pool and provides flood control, conservation storage and diversion into the Madera and Friant- Kern Canals. It allows for delivery of water to a million acres of agricultural land in Fresno, Kern, Madera and Tulare Counties in the San Joaquin Valley. The reservoir, Millerton Lake, first stored water on February 21, 1944. It has a total capacity of 520,528 acre-feet, a surface area of 4,900 acres and the River is inundated at full storage for approximately 15 miles long. The amount of flood control storage space is dictated by a USACOE Reservoir Regulation Manual.
In the Friant Division, there are three (3) separate river and canal outlets: the river outlet works, the Friant- Kern Canal and the Madera Canal. The river outlet works consist of four (4) 110-inch-diameter steel pipes through Friant Dam that are controlled by four (4) 96-inch-diameter hollow-jet valves at the outlet ends. The valves release water down a chute and into a stilling basin, which dissipates the water’s energy. The capacity of the four (4) hollow-jet valves is 16,400 cfs, however, prior to discharge of Settlement Flows,
June 2018 C-13 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
the flow through the valves seldom exceeded 100 cfs. Small releases to the River flow through two (2) 24- inch-diameter steel pipes branching from Penstocks 3 and 4. Releases are controlled by two (2) 18-inch- diameter needle valves at the outlet ends.
The Friant-Kern Canal carries water over 151.8 miles in a southerly direction from Millerton Lake to the Kern River, four (4) miles west of Bakersfield. The water is used for supplemental and new irrigation supplies in Fresno, Tulare and Kern Counties. Construction of the canal began in 1945 and was completed in 1951. The canal has an initial capacity of 5,000 cubic feet per second that gradually decreases to 2,000 cubic feet per second at its terminus in the Kern River.
More than 350 overhead and underground telephone lines, telegraph lines, power lines, and oil and gas lines were moved to higher elevations or relocated during construction of the Friant Kern Canal. Heavy crawler tractors and bulldozers that were equipped with attachments to cut roots below the surface burrowed through vineyards and orchards. Along a 113-mile reach between the dam and the White River, more than 500 different structures, including overchutes, drainage inlets, irrigation crossings and turnouts were built. During construction, placement of concrete lining was aided by the use of a traveling gantry. Almost 85 percent of the canal is concrete-lined. In those sections, the canal’s maximum top width is 128 feet, decreasing to a bottom width of 24 feet, with water depth dropping from 19.9 to 11 feet. In the earth-lined sections, water depth varies and the canal bottom width ranges from 64 to 40 feet.
State Water Project (SWP)
The California State Water Project, commonly known as the SWP, is a state water management project under the supervision of the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The SWP is the world’s largest publicly built and operated water and power development and conveyance system. It provides water for drinking purposes to more than 23 million people and generates an average of 6.5 MWh of hydroelectricity annually. It is also the largest single consumer of power in the State with a net usage of 5.1 MWh.
Although no facilities of the SWP are located within the boundaries of the IRWMP, they are still of significant importance to the DCTRA IRWMP area. The nearest SWP facilities are on the west-side of the San Joaquin Valley. The nearest distribution system facilities are those of the Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District. These facilities offset the need to pump groundwater by providing the conveyance mechanism to import water from the Feather River to the west-side of the Central Valley.
Approximately 70 percent of the water provided by the SWP is used for urban areas and industry in the Southern California and the San Francisco Bay areas. The remaining 30 percent is used for irrigation in the Central Valley and the Central Coastal Range. The SWP shares several facilities with the Federal CVP. Water is often interchanged between SWP and CVP facilities, as needed, to meet peak requirements for the separate project constituents.
With construction beginning in 1960, the SWP required the construction of 21 dams and more than 700 miles of canals, pipelines and tunnels. To date, the SWP has only delivered an average of 2.4 million acre- feet annually, as compared to total contractual entitlements of 4.23 million acre-feet. Environmental concerns caused by the dry-season removal of water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta have often led to further reductions in water delivery declarations.
June 2018 C-14 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
In development for a number of years, ground was broken for Oroville Dam in 1961 and, in 1963, work began on the California Aqueduct and San Luis Reservoir. First deliveries to the South Bay area were made in 1962 with irrigation deliveries to the San Joaquin Valley by 1968. In 1973, the pumps and East and West branches of the California Aqueduct were completed and the first water delivered to Southern California. A Peripheral Canal which would have carried SWP water around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta, was rejected in 1982 by voters due to a combination of environmental and economic concerns. The Coastal branch was completed in 1997.
Reduce Reliance on Sacramento-San Juaquin Delta Supply
In compliance with 2016 IRWM Guidelines, this IRWMP identifies ways in which the region can reduce dependence on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Reducing the region’s dependence on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta water supply requires a combination of efforts to decrease water demand and increase water supply. These efforts are represented in several sections throughout this IRWMP.
Objective 13 (See Section Section E – Goals and Objectives) specifically seeks to decrease the region’s water demand by increasing water use efficiency and promoting conservation and recycling of water resources. Additionally, several Resource Management Strategies discussed in Section F seek to reduce water demand, increase water use efficiency, and increase drought resiliency. These include:
• Agricultural Water Use Efficiency • Urban Water Use Efficiency • Crop Idling for Water Transfers • Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage • Recycled Municipal Water • Precipitation Enhancement
Section P – Water Management Opportunities identifies plans to reduce reliance on the delta through groundwater banking programs. This would allow water districts within the IRWMP region to store water during wet years for use during drought periods, thereby increasing the region’s water independence and drought resilience.
C.6.2 Wastewater Service Providers
City Wastewater System
In a different fashion than a provision of domestic, commercial and industrial water supplies, the wastewater treatment and disposal facilities serving the City of Porterville located within the IRWMP area, are operated by the City. In some cases, additional permits have been issued by the RWQCB for reclamation of treated effluent by individual parties acting under contract with the City for acceptance of treated wastewater for reclamation purposes. As detailed in Chapter 5 related to the history of wastewater systems development within the IRWMP area, these facilities are under regulation of the RWQCB and are of the advanced secondary treatment type. In the City’s case, the collection system serving is also owned by the City and operated and maintained by their permanent staff.
June 2018 C-15 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Rural Wastewater Systems
Several wastewater collection, treatment and disposal systems exist within the IRWMP area. The Pixley Public Utility District, Poplar Community Service District, Strathmore Public Utility District, Woodville Public Utility District and the Woodville Farm Labor Camp facility of the Tulare County Housing Authority are the principal systems in this category. In many cases, areas outside of the principal service areas have been tied in with municipal systems based on multiple considerations, including economic and staffing considerations. These areas include the East Porterville area served by the Porter Vista Public Utility District and the Porterville Developmental Center. The balance of the areas are on individual treatment and disposal systems, for the most part in the form of septic tanks and leach fields.
County-operated Wastewater Systems
The County of Tulare operates a number of collection, treatment and disposal systems within the County. Among these systems, the system serving the community of Terra Bella, in the form of the Terra Bella Sewer Maintenance District, is administered by the County. Financial and day-to-day administrative duties are performed by County personnel, while field operations are performed under contract by a for-profit licensed operator.
C.6.3 Flood Control Districts
The Tulare County Flood Control District plays a fundamental role in Regional Water Management Planning. The Tulare County Flood Control District, is responsible for the management of flood channels within the Tule River Basin boundaries and has defined roles relative to conservation space within Success Reservoir, which is principally a flood control facility.
In addition to the Tulare County Flood Control District, the City of Porterville plays a role in flood management and is responsible for the management of flood channels within the city limits. Regional flood zones are shown in Figure C-4.
June 2018 C-16 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
June 2018 C-17 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.7 Land Use Agencies
There are a number of land use agencies that have jurisdiction within the IRWM planning area. These agencies include Tulare County, the incorporated City of Porterville, and several unincorporated communities. Cooperation with land use agencies is essential to effective water management. These agencies are summarized below in Table C-2.
Table C-2. Land Use Agencies
Location in IRWM planning Population Name Type area (2010 Census) The IRWM planning area is Tulare County County located within the Tulare County boundary North-east quarter of the City of Porterville Incorporated City 55,466* IRWM planning area Census Designated North-east quarter of the East Porterville Unincorporated IRWM planning area, east of 7,331
Community the City of Porterville Census Designated South-east corner of the Terra Bella Unincorporated IRWM planning area, south of 3,310
Community the city of Porterville Census Designated North-west quarter of the Tipton Unincorporated 2,543 IRWM planning area Community Census Designated South-west quarter of the Pixley Unincorporated IRWM planning area, south of 3,310 Community Tipton Census Designated Northern half of the IRWM Woodville Unincorporated planning area, in-between 1,740 Community Porterville in Tipton Census Designated Center of the IRWM planning Poplar Unincorporated area, north of Terra Bella and 2,470 Community south of Porterville Census Designated South-west quarter of the 471 Allensworth Unincorporated IRWM planning area, south of
Community the DCTRA southern boundary Census Designated southern half of the IRWM Teviston Unincorporated planning area between Pixley 1,214 Community and Terra Bella *Population in 2014
June 2018 C-18 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Figure C-5. Land Use Agencies
C.8 Water Quality
This section describes current water quality conditions for surface and groundwater within the Tule River Basin IRWMP region and the potential sources of Contamination. Additionally, this section will identify and describe instances of nitrates, arsenic, perchlorate, and hexavalent chromium contamination and provide a discussion of how this plan addresses the contamination.
C.8.1 Groundwater Quality
Groundwater quality within the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority (DCTRA) Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) area is generally considered in two (2) different contexts. The first of these is agriculture with the second being municipal and industrial. Of principal concern in the municipal and industrial category, the capability of the supply to satisfy State and Federal drinking water standards and, for industrial users, the capability to satisfy requirements for manufacturing and processing of related products.
Historically, pursuit of the evaluation of the quality capability of groundwater in a particular area to satisfy agricultural related needs has been left to individual landowners/growers. Several of the member districts of DCTRA extract groundwater for delivery to their landowners/growers, including Vandalia Water District, Tea Pot Dome Water District and Terra Bella Irrigation District. Sampling and testing to determine suitability for agricultural purposes has typically been undertaken by the landowner/grower. In the case of the Terra Bella Irrigation District, as their wells are utilized for residential consumption to augment the Friant-Kern Canal source, said wells are tested on a routine basis.
June 2018 C-19 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
As a result of the pursuit of quality related information on an individual basis, a very minor amount of information exists in the public arena as to the general water quality of the area. Older studies by the U.S. Geological Survey provide some insight as to water quality parameters, however, many of the investigations performed by said agency were specifically targeted to either problem areas or problem constituents, such as Boron and Arsenic.
This trend is being reversed as the RWQCB Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP) General Order has been adopted and brings with it a new groundwater water quality investigation and evaluation component. Very controversial in its nature, parties have applied to represent landowners within the RWQCB’s jurisdiction and that is the case within the DCTRA IRWMP area. The Tule Basin Water Quality Coalition has been recognized by the RWQCB as the third-party representative of growers in the Tule Basin. Initial steps required under the General Order include an initial Groundwater Assessment Report which was prepared with principal emphasis on the vulnerability of the groundwater reservoir to impacts from irrigated agricultural related discharges. Of particular importance, nutrient related impacts and pesticide related impacts are of high significance.
In the current agricultural arena, efforts associated with the Dairy Industry General Order, also adopted by the RWQCB, has been in place for several years. The groundwater component associated with said order is specifically related to the private wells located on dairies and monitor wells designed and constructed in locations adjacent to sumps containing dairy waste prior to land application. A substantial amount of information is currently in inventory and, while significant in nature, is restricted to those areas where dairies exist.
In contrast to the agricultural areas, characterization of groundwater supplied for municipal and industrial and rural drinking water purposes has generated a significant quantity of information related to its quality related parameters. This data is available from the individual purveyors and is lodged, by electronic transmittal, by testing laboratories directly to the SWRCB Division of Drinking Water database. Public access to this database is available electronically, with the exception of well log information. For each agency to whom the Division of Drinking Water has issued a water supply permit, they are required to issue, no later than July 1 of each year to each customer, a Consumer Confidence Report (CCR). Identified as the CCR, this document must meet specific format requirements and is designed to not only provide the drinking water customer with specific information with regard to the numeric test results related to their drinking water, but also is to provide information with respect to allowable limits and potential health effects of certain contaminants. In some cases within the IRWMP area, this CCR is provided in a bilingual format.
C.8.2 Surface Water Quality
In diametric opposition to groundwater quality, significant information exists with respect to surface water quality in the agricultural regions of the IRWMP area, with little information related to water quality associated with the urban and rural developed areas. What storm water related water quality testing takes place, the data is frequently in concert with the agricultural related water quality program seeking to identify principally, any introduced contaminants which may be identified as having agricultural origins.
The ILRP program of the RWQCB, prior to the recently adopted General Order, required a surface water quality oriented program for each watershed within its jurisdiction. For the Tule Basin, this program was undertaken by the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority. Information related to surface water quality under
June 2018 C-20 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
this program was developed over a period of time in excess of a decade. The data from this program is reported by each watershed to the RWQCB with test result information specifically transmitted to the State Water Resources Control Board database, which is electronically accessible to the public. Formatting requirements for information submittal have been changed from time-to-time related to this database and when those changes have been made, conversion requirements have existed to reformat prior information to satisfy the new format requirements.
In addition to submittal of the information to the SWRCB database, annual reports are prepared for each watershed which contain the specific test result information generated over the prior year along with responses to observed water quality failures.
Specific to the Tule River Basin IRWMP area, the Coalition has identified core monitoring locations of the natural waterways for sampling which are presented in Appendix D (TBWQC Surface Sampling Locations). The core sampling locations are identified by a legend driven system. Sampling and testing at these monitoring sites have been consistent with the orders issued by the RWQCB since the inception of testing. Additional sites have been added over time based on either identified water quality concerns or seeking out clarity on whether or not contamination exists at those locations. For the most part, surface water quality within the IRWMP area is of very high quality.
Where contamination has been shown to exist, steps have been taken to identify the source of the contamination and where found, to work with the landowner/grower(s) to initiate actions to bring about a change in the discharge or eliminate the adverse contaminant in the discharge.
Where water quality problems have been discovered and have not been quickly resolved, Management Plans have been generated to deal with the specific area where contamination was found and the specific contaminant. In some cases, where Management Plans have been developed, it has still not been determined if the contaminant source is from irrigated agriculture, household use of pesticides and herbicides, or commercial spraying operations such as those associated with State highways and county roads. In some cases, discovery of contamination has been found to be associated with activities other than irrigated agriculture.
The conduct of this surface water program has transitioned to the newly formed Tule Basin Water Quality Coalition based on acceptance of said entity by the RWQCB. As the new General Order contains both a surface water element and a groundwater element, it was determined by the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority that they did not desire to directly conduct the groundwater portion of the program as required by the new General Order.
June 2018 C-21 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.8.3 Arsenic
Arsenic pollution can be caused by natural deposits in the earth or by industrial and agricultural pollution. In 2001, the EPA adopted a new standard of 10 ppb for arsenic in drinking water. Exceedances of this threshold are considered unsafe and ingestion can pose both chronic (long-term) and acute (short term) health risks. The potential health effects following long term arsenic ingestion include skin damage, problems with the circulatory system, and an increased risk of cancer.
As seen below in Figure C-6, arsenic levels vary greatly throughout the region. The majority of the region is below the maximum contaminant level threshold. Samples were collected from water districts throughout the IRWMP region intermittently from 2008 to 2016. More consistent sampling is needed to adequately measure and manage arsenic contamination.
It is likely that instances of arsenic contamination in IRWMP area are due to natural deposits which are common to the region. The sediments in these areas exhibit soil redox conditions which can cause some medals, including arsenic, to become soluble. Water then transports the contaminant into waterbodies through natural processes.
The Pixley Public Utility District exceeds the maximum contaminant level threshold, however arsenic levels in this district have declined since 2012 as programs were put in place to treat contaminated wells. Additional programs to address and remediate arsenic contamination are included in the 2015 Pixley Community Plan.
Although the majority of the region is below the maximum contaminant level threshold for arsenic concentration, arsenic levels should continue to be monitored regularly throughout the region and managed as needed. More information regarding the sampling and data analysis methods can be found in Section J – Data Management. Tables showing all data used can be found in Appendix E.
Arsenic Levels Detected 25
20
15
10
5 Arsenic Concentration (ppb) (ppb) Concentration Arsenic 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Terra Bella Irrigation District Pixley Public Utility District Tipton Community Service District Poplar Community Services District Woodville Public Utility District City of Porterville Maximum Contaminant Levels (Typical)*
Figure C-6. Arsenic levels detected in IRWMP region (Data source: DCTRA water quality monitoring program)
June 2018 C-22 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.8.4 Nitrate
Nitrate is one of the most common groundwater contaminants in rural areas and can be the result of fertilizer runoff, sewage, or erosion of natural deposits. The California Water Resources Control Board established a 45 ppm maximum contaminant level for nitrates to minimize health and environmental imapcts associated with nitrate contamination. Although nitrate concentrations at this level are rarely harmful to adults, it can be fatal to infants. Additionally, nitrates in waterbodies can lead to algal blooms and eutrophication.
As seen in figure C-7, exceedances of the maximum contaminant level threshold were not detected in the region. The districts should continue to be sampled and analyzed annually to ensure that nitrate levels remain below the 45 ppm threshold.
More information regarding the sampling and data analysis methods can be found in Section J – Data Management. Tables showing all data used can be found in Appendix E.
Nitrate Levels Detected 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5
Nitrate Concentration (ppm) Concentration Nitrate 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Terra Bella Irrigation District Pixley Public Utility District Tipton Community Service District Poplar Community Services District Woodville Public Utility District City of Porterville Maximum Contaminant Levels
Figure C-7. Nitrate levels detected in IRWMP region (Data source: DCTRA water quality monitoring program)
June 2018 C-23 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.8.5 Perchlorate
Perchlorates are a common name for a family of salts which include ammonium, potassium, magnesium and sodium perchlorate. Perchlorate is not found naturally in California and contamination of water resources is almost certainly anthropogenic and caused by perchlorate salts used in industrial and military applications. Approximately 90% of the locations where perchlorate has been detected were associated with the manufacturing or testing of rocket fuels. Perchlorates are highly soluble and travel easily into groundwater supplies. It is a relatively stable molecule that is resistant to degradation.
The California Department of Public Health has adopted a maximum contaminant level for perchlorate of 6 μg/L to address the health risks associated with perchlorate consumption. Perchlorates can cause harm to human health by limiting uptake of iodine by the thyroid gland. This can decrease production of thyroid hormone, which is needed for prenatal growth and development, as well as for normal metabolic and mental function in adults.
Perchlorate concentration data is not grouped by district. Figure C-8 displays the regional average perchlorate concentration and highest observed perchlorate concentration for each year, in comparison to the MCL. The highest observed concentration of 2008 is not shown in the graph because the recorded concentration is an extreme outlier in comparison to the other data. Percolate levels exceeding the MCL were observed in the IRWMP region from 2001 to 2011, however all water samples were below the threshold from 2012 to 2017. This improvement in water quality is most likely due to improvements in state water quality legislation, as well as increased public awareness of perchlorate as a harmful contaminant. Wells within the region should continue to be sampled and analyzed annually to ensure that perchlorate concentrations remain below 6 ug/L.
More information regarding the sampling and data analysis methods can be found in Section L – Technical Analysis. Tables showing all data used can be found in Appendix E.
Perchlorate Levels Detected 25
20
15
10
5
Perchlorate Concentration (ug/L) 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Average Perchlorate Concentration Highest Concentration Observed Maximum Contaminant Level
Figure C-8. Perchlorate levels detected in IRWMP region (Data source: National Water Quality Monitoring Council)
June 2018 C-24 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.8.6 Hexavalent Chromium
Hexavalent Chromium is a naturally occurring heavy metal that can cause harm to the respiratory system, kidneys, liver, skin, and eyes. Hexavalent chromium enters water bodies through discharges of dye, wood preservatives, chrome plating wastes, and leeching from hazardous waste sites.
Much debate is currently under way with regards to establishing an MCL for Hexavalent Chromium. Prior to May of 2017, a 10 ug/L MCL for Hexavalent Chromium was enforced by the California Department of Public Health, who was responsible for the drinking water program before it was transferred to the State Water Board. In May of 2017, the Superior Court of Sacramento County issued a judgement to delete the hexavalent chromium MCL from the California Code of Regulations. At present, hexavalent chromium is regulated under the 50 ug/L primary drinking water standard for total chromium. Most scientists think this limit is insufficient for chemical’s toxicity so the State Water Resources Control Board is expected to reestablish a 10 ug/L MCL.
Figure C-9 displays annual regional average hexavalent chromium concentrations and the highest concentration observed each year in comparison to the anticipated 10 ug/L MCL. All samples within the IRWMP region were tested below this threshold, however monitoring should continue on an annual basis to ensure hexavalent chromium concentrations do not exceed water safety standards.
More information regarding the sampling and data analysis methods can be found in Section L – Technical Analysis. Tables showing all data used can be found in Appendix E.
Hexavalent Chromium Levels Detected 12
10
8
6
4
2
0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Average Hexavalent Chromium Concentration Highest Concentration Observed Maximum Contaminant Level
Figure C-9. Hexavalent chromium levels detected in IRWMP region (Data source: National Water Quality Monitoring Council)
June 2018 C-25 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.8.7 Potential Sources of Contamination
Several potential sources of contamination exist within the IRWMP area. For some of these potential sources, such as irrigated agriculture, programs are in place to not only identify contaminants and the source of contaminants and to work on cessation of discharge of such contaminants, but also have structured regulatory requirements associated with the efforts. For others, such as septic tanks and subterranean leach field systems, requirements exist in some areas for monitoring of the condition of the systems and remedying identified problems, while in other areas, such regulation is totally absent. In some of the potential contaminant arenas, such as abandoned wells, there is only now a County of Tulare based program to abate the problems associated with the abandoned facilities. The following is a discussion of each of the current identified potential sources of contamination within the DCTRA IRWMP area.
Failing Septic Systems
In certain areas of the IRWMP, the RWQCB has issued a specific order to deal with design, inspection and operational considerations related to septic tank systems. An identified organization, typically a homeowners association, is required to report information from each homeowner related to the frequency of their septic tank pumping and, where dual leach field systems are required, the frequency of rotation between those systems.
The design of a new septic tank system is under the jurisdiction of the County of Tulare with soil percolation tests often required to accompany the design to ensure proper performance of the subterranean disposal system. Once installed, however, unless adverse conditions are noticed by an agency of jurisdiction, or complaints are received by same, no oversight exists with respect to these systems. In no cases within the IRWMP area have there been or are there studies related to the specific impacts of septic tank and subterranean disposal systems on the accumulation of contaminants to groundwater. Septic tanks are designed as biological reactors to reduce the pollution strength of certain contaminants within the waste stream delivered to the disposal system. They are not, however, designed to reduce nutrient loads, such as nitrates, which is a task often left to the soil structure which exists from the disposal area to first encountered groundwater. The adequacy of the soils to accomplish any degree of nitrate reduction is not an initial design consideration, nor are the programs to determine the efficiency of the systems in this regard. Thus, these systems have been identified as potential sources of contamination.
Abandoned Wells
Recent attention has been given to the issue of lack of destruction of abandoned wells within the Tule River Basin IRWMP by the County of Tulare. A current active project of the County within the KDWCD IRWMP, being conducted under a grant to the KDWCD and allocated to the County of Tulare, is a pilot program of identification of areas where abandoned wells exist which place in jeopardy existing water production facilities and to identify and implement steps to properly destroy those wells in concert with applicable State and County ordinance requirements.
While the State and the County have standards and ordinances related to well destruction, the standards are related to the abandonment procedure strictly and not to the identification of the location of these wells or conditions under which wells must be properly destroyed. Any number of circumstances can be
June 2018 C-26 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
referenced in which abandoned wells have been discovered in locations where proper destruction should have taken place, but did not. In addition, there is no identified program at any level of government to routinely seek out these locations and effect abandonment. For these reasons, abandoned wells have been identified as a potential source of contamination. These wells are of particular concern as they are drilled across water-bearing strata and act as a conduit to draw water from one aquifer to another, transporting with this water contaminants from one aquifer to another.
Landfills
Historically, dump operations were located with transport distance from the source to the repository being the principal locating factor. Dump closure, including landfill closures, were often conducted without consideration to downslope groundwater contamination. Brought about by regulatory change, investigations began to occur wherein it was required of dump and landfill owners to identify whether or not the subject facility was contributing to groundwater contamination. Where identified to be the case, clean-up operations were undertaken and continue to be undertaken to abate any further contribution to the groundwater reservoir of contaminants from the subject facilities. Of particular concern has been the migration from these facilities materials for which the soil mantle lacks the capability to provide reduction of the harmful effects of the material. In this family are materials such as pharmaceuticals and petroleum wastes, coupled with the household disposal of unwanted pesticide and herbicide materials. Disposal of these materials has led to Vadose Zone contamination downslope of the disposal facilities. Frequently observed at both closed sites and operating sites are extraction facilities designed to abate the effects of these contaminants. As considerable oversight exists from local, State and Federal regulatory levels, the DCTRA IRWMP does not call for an increased level of scrutiny and oversight with respect to this source of contamination.
Leaking Underground Fuel Tank (LUFT)
In a similar fashion to the landfill category, the program to abate the effects of leaking underground fuel storage tanks is well developed. A state-wide program, covered by a per-gallon fuel tax, collected at the pump, has been utilized successfully for several years in cleaning up and abating the effects of leaking underground fuel storage facilities. In addition to this successful program, new standards have been brought to bear for tank installations requiring double-walled tanks, sensors located between the tank walls to sense leaking from the first storage facility, elimination of underground tanks and movement to above-ground tanks and toward total containment systems wherein a leak is totally confined to a secondary area upon failure of the first. In many cases, these new regulations have eliminated the number of tanks which existed with farmsteads and individuals who previously had tanks for their use eliminating the option and fueling at commercial locations.
Based on the current State clean-up program and the current requirements related to new facility installation, this IRWMP does not call for additional oversight consideration related to fuel storage tanks.
June 2018 C-27 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Irrigated Agriculture
Considerable attention has been given for some time to the potential contamination of groundwater and surface waters from sources identified as being associated with irrigated agriculture. As programs are in place, in addition to regulatory and statutory requirements, it is accepted by this IRWMP that irrigated agriculture is a potential source of contamination. Efforts will continue to be expended to track the results of the ongoing programs, particularly as any adverse water quality occurrences may affect not only the beneficial use of available surface water and groundwater sources available to the IRWMP area, but may also affect land uses and land use planning.
Confined Animal Facilities
On a similar, but earlier pathway to the ILRP, the RWQCB identified confined animal facilities as potential sources of contamination affecting both surface water and groundwater. As a result, the RWQCB has placed confined animal facilities in a category to be regulated specific to certain findings of the RWQCB and with dedicated staff associated with oversight on the orders issued by the RWQCB. Unlike the General Order related to irrigated lands, the General Order related to confined animal facilities does not address representation by a third-party. Each individual operator has to respond to the General Order and while some monitoring is conducted on an area-wide or region-wide basis, reporting is still accomplished on a by-operator basis.
In addition to State oversight and regulation, the County of Tulare requires Conditional Use Permits for confined animal facilities. The process of issuing these permits involves a significant degree of scrutiny and oversight often requiring an in-depth and extensive environmental document which first must be considered, prior to any permit-related action.
As with the ILRP, it is a practice of the IRWMP process to track RWQCB actions related to confined animal facilities, County actions with regard to same and monitoring for trends from the reported outcomes of groundwater sampling and testing. These activities of the IRWM are envisioned to continue with the same, or increased, oversight by DCTRA.
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Wastewater treatment and disposal systems serving urban and rural areas are subject to the Waste Discharge Requirements process of the RWQCB. Discharges to surface water require not only that action, but an additional action of the issuance of a permit under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) which, in California, allows for primacy to be exercised by the SWRCB under agreement with the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. As a part of adopted and issued permit processes for both Waste Discharge Requirements and NPDES permits, a substantial monitoring and reporting program is a part. In addition, the RWQCB has instituted a spill notification program associated with sanitary sewer collection systems which require monthly reporting at a minimum and short-term reporting of any spill incident. In addition to written reports being required to be submitted to the RWQCB, monthly test result information is required to be submitted to the SWRCB database, which is accessible to the public electronically.
June 2018 C-28 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
The siting of treatment and disposal facilities is a land use issue, not only for each of the counties of jurisdiction within the IRWMP, but also for the applicable Local Agency Formation Commissions. Issues related to spheres of influence, boundary expansions and types of development are given consideration in the County arena and by the Local Agency Formation Commission. A part of any of the major facility permit requirements is a Groundwater Monitoring Plan, with its separate requirements. Data from these programs is often required to be submitted monthly and at most quarterly, in order to allow for any adverse trends to be identified quickly and steps taken to identify and correct any adverse condition. At the current time, this information is not tracked, nor analyzed as a part of the IRWMP process.
Storm Water Runoff
Storm water runoff is generated from a number of sources including native pasture and irrigated lands, county and state highway systems, developed rural and urban areas and isolated commercial and industrial processing facilities, including packing sheds and cold storage facilities. For areas subject to structurally intense development procedures, County permit requirements typically mandate retention basins be developed as a part of the development package. The design characteristics associated with these facilities are such that they address retention of storms to a defined frequency in the onsite facilities.
In a similar fashion, rural concentrated development and urban development is accompanied with the design and construction of storm water collection and detention facilities designed to what has been identified as a level where, for most precipitation conditions within the IRWMP area, are considered to be the dominant pattern. In some cases, storm water systems discharge to public district and ditch company facilities by agreement and to natural stream systems in order to eliminate the need for the acquisition and development of land for the purpose of retention of the developed waters. With very few exceptions, mostly associated with the ILRP, testing of the quality of these waters is not accomplished, certainly not on a schedule driven basis. The water quality test results associated with storm water discharges incorporated into the ILRP are monitored by the DCTRA IRWMP as a normal activity of staff of DCTRA member units and their consultants. As noted, beyond the ILRP efforts and the aged efforts of the U.S. Geological Survey, water quality information associated with storm water discharges is virtually non- existent.
C.9 Cultural, Social, and Economic Profile
A region’s social and cultural makeup is a key consideration in integrated regional water management planning. The U.S. EPA’s guide “Community Culture and the Environment: A Guide to Understanding a Sense of Place” recommends a variety of ways to define a community in order to better understand the community’s sense of place and cultural values.
The following information was assessed to develop and understanding of the Region’s Cultural, Social, and Economic Profile:
• Local Organizations and Associations • Local Traditions and Community Events • Demographic Information • Economic Conditions
June 2018 C-29 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.9.1 Local Organizations and Associations
Local organizations and associations play an active role within the Tule River Basin region. These organizations serve to protect and enhance the societal segments for which they were created. Examples of such community groups are listed below in Table C-3. These organizations provide an opportunity for community members to become involved in a variety of social facets throughout the region.
Table C-3. Local Organizations and Associations
Societal Segments Examples of Local Organizations and Associations Tulare County Farm Bureau Tulare County Dairy Herd Improvement Association Agriculture Porterville FFA Almond Board of California Tulare County Chamber of Commerce Business, Transportation, and Tulare County Association of Realtors Housing Home Builders Association of Tulare Tulare County Bar Association Tulare County Historical Society Native American Heritage Commission Cultural Porterville Art Association Tulare-Kings Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Tulare County Hispanic Leadership Network Tulare-Kings Music Educators Association Tulare County School Boards Association Education Tulare County Association of Educators Porterville Educators Association Tulare Counmty Citizens for Responsible Growth WildPlaces Environmental Tulare Basin Wildlife Partners Tulare County Audubon Society Tulare County Medical Society Foodlink for Tulare County Inc. Health and Community Welfare Habitat for Humanity of Tulare/Kings Counties Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance Tulare County City of Porterville Local Government Community Service Districts Tulare County Association of Governments Churches and Religious Organizations Porterville Christian Women’s Club Religion Tulare-Kings County’s Youth for Christ Catholic Professional and Business Club of Tulare-Kings Tulare County Trap Club Tourism and Recreation Southern Tulare County Sportsman’s Association Sequoia Tourism Council
June 2018 C-30 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.9.2 Local Traditions and Community Events
Local traditions and community events bring community members together and highlight commonly held community values. The following list describes the most notable community events and traditions within the IRWM region. These activities celebrate the region’s history, cultural influences, and values.
• Tule River Powwow: The Tule River Powwow is a national event that takes place every September in Porterville. The event brings Native Americans from throughout North America to compete in various Tribal drumming and dancing contests. The Tule River Powwow event is open to the public and visitors can enjoy a variety of demonstrations in Native American art, basket weaving, and language.
• Porterville Fair & Junior Livestock Show: The Porterville Fair was first established in 1948 and is considered a community tradition. The event highlights the region’s agricultural prosperity through a variety of Livestock shows, including exhibits from local 4-H and FFA chapters.
• Iris Festival: The Iris Festival takes place at Sutton’s Iris Garden in Porterville. As the world’s largest distributor of reblooming Iris, the City of Porterville declared the Purple Iris its official flower in 1963 and celebrates the flower at its annual Iris Festival each April, during blooming season. Visitors can enjoy walking through fields of blooming Iris flowers as well as an annual Chili Cookoff.
• Juneteenth: Allensworth is a community founded in 1908 by a former slave who sought to create a community where African Americans could self-govern and thrive without racial discrimination. The Juneteenth celebration in Allensworth honors this history by commemorating June 19, 1865, the day considered to be the effective end of slavery in the United States. The event includes guest speakers, historic building tours, and a variety of food and beverage options.
• Allensworth Old Time Jubilee: The Allensworth Old Time Jubilee is a family-friendly event takes place every year in May and celebrates the time of year when the carnival would come to the historic town. Visitors can enjoy a variety of games, live entertainment, and demonstrations of early 20th century activities.
C.9.3 Demographic Information
Census information provides a basic profile of the current social characteristics of the communities within the IRWM boundary. Figures C-10 through C-16 provide a visual summary of census information describing the following demographic information:
• Median Age • Educational Attainment • Ethnicity • Language
Median Age: As shown in Figure C-10 below, the population within the IRWM planning area is relatively young in comparison to the State’s population. The median age of most communities within the region is between 20 and 30. The high number of individuals between the ages of 20 and 30 suggests significant potential for population growth at an increased rate compared to the State.
June 2018 C-31 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Median Age 40
30
20
10
0
Figure C-10. Median age of residents within the IRWMP region. (Data source: Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimate)
Educational Attainment: Levels of educational attainment within the IRWM planning area are relatively low in comparison to the State as a whole. The primary variations in educational attainment between the IRWM planning area and the State are high school graduation rates and rates of bachelors or higher degree attainment. As shown below, the IRWM planning area has a far higher proportion of residents who have not obtained a high school diploma or equivalency as compared to the State. The State has a much higher proportion of individuals who have obtained a bachelor’s degree or higher in comparison to the IRWM planning area. The State and IRWM planning area have relatively similar proportions of individuals whose highest educational attainment is a high school diploma (or equivalency), some college (no degree) or an associate’s degree.
Educational Attainment 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0%
Less than High School Graduate High School Graduate (Includes Equivalency) Some college, no degree Associate's degree Bachelor's degree Graduate or professional degree
Figure C-11. Highest level of educational attainment of residents within the IRWMP region. (Data source: Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimate)
June 2018 C-32 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Ethnicity and Language: As shown in figures C-12 to C-14 below, the IRWMP area contains higher proportions of Hispanic and Native American individuals in comparison to the state as a whole. Approximately 80% of residents within the IRWM planning area over the age of 5 speak Spanish in the home, and more than half of Spanish-speaking residents describe their ability to speak English as less than “very well.” These findings suggest that all public outreach materials for projects within the scope of this IRWMP must be provided in both English and Spanish, in order to better allow non-English speaking participants to participate in important water management decisions.
Ethnic Diversity 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Hispanic White Black Asian Native American 2+
Figure C-12. Ethnic Diversity within the IRWMP region. (Data source: Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimate)
Language Spoken at Home (Population 5 Years and Older)
English only (15.4%)
Spanish (80.7%)
Other Indo-European languages (0.5 %)
Asian and Pacific Islander languages (2.8%)
Other languages (0.6%)
Figure C-13. Language spoken at home of population 5-years and over within the IRWMP region. (Data source: Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimate)
June 2018 C-33 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
Ability to Speak English (Percent of Specified Non-English Language Users)
Other languages
Asian and Pacific Islander languages
Other Indo-European languages
Spanish
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Speak English "very well" Speak English less than "very well"
Figure C-14. Percent of Non-English language users ability to speak English. (Data source: Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimate)
C.9.4 Projected Population Growth
Tulare county is projected to grow to over 1,000,000 residents by 2050. The 2010 Tulare County General Plan Background Report identifies a 1.3% projected annual growth rate for unincorporated areas of Tulare County. The City of Porterville General Plan predicts that the city’s population will grow by an average 3.7% annually. These values were used to project the population growth within the IRWMP region through 2040. As shown in Figure C-10, the IRWMP region’s population is project to grow from 76,554 to 194,080 between 2010 and 2040. This growth will lead to increasing demand for water in the future. The region’s ability to meet these demands will depend on effective water management and is a primary goal for this IRWMP.
Projected Population Growth (2010-2040) 200000 180000 160000 140000 120000 100000 Population 80000 60000 40000 20000 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Porterville East Porterville Terra Bella Tipton Pixley Woodville Poplar Allensworth Teviston
Figure C-15. Predicted urban population growth.
June 2018 C-34 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.9.5 Economic Conditions and Trends
The California Central Valley is one of the most productive regions on earth and produces 8% of the nation’s total agricultural output. As such, agriculture is the primary economic driver in the IRWMP region. The nation’s dependence on crops grown within the IRWMP region makes it is extremely likely that the industry will continue to flourish and that agriculture will continue to be the primary economic driver into the future.
The IRWMP region is also distinguished economically by the large presence of disadvantaged communities. Almost all of the communities in the IRWM planning area meet the state definition of a disadvantaged community (DAC), meaning that the median household income is less than 80% of the statewide average. As such, DACs play a critical role in the IRWM planning process. While most small DACs are not signatory to the Plan MOU, many do participate on the same basis as signatory parties. Special efforts have been made to educate and engage DACs within the planning area, and DAC issues are central to the development of IRWMP objectives and projects.
Median Income $70,000.00
$60,000.00
$50,000.00
$40,000.00
$30,000.00
$20,000.00
$10,000.00
$-
Figure C-16. Median household income within the IRWM planning area. (Data source: Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimate)
June 2018 C-35 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section C – Region Description
C.10 Key Region Wide and Watershed Specific Issues
There are a number of key issues related to water management within the IRWM Planning Area. These include issues related to groundwater conditions, water quality, and disadvantaged communities. Correcting these issues is a primary focus of the IRWM Plan and possible solutions are addressed throughout the document.
Declining groundwater conditions of the Tule Sub basin is a principal issue in the region. Extensive over drafting has escalated the price of groundwater extraction and created potential conflicts between agricultural water users, who have rights to the majority of surface water, and rural/urban water users, whose sole source of supply is groundwater. Although these stakeholder groups currently consider themselves to have common interests, tension will likely form as water availability declines.
Impacts of land use decisions on water quality is another source of contention in the region. An inadequate level of communication exists between land use planners and those responsible for water management. This is exemplified through land use planners’ approval of land uses that require water quality compliant with state and federal drinking water standards in areas in areas where compliant water sources are unavailable. This ultimately results in the unavailability of compliant water quality sources to end users. This issue can be seen in both legacy and current land use practices.
C.10.1 Tribal Community Water Challenges
The Tule River Tribal Reservation is located upstream of the IRWM planning area along the South Fork of the Tule River. Securing adequate water resources is a primary challenge for the Tribe, particularly during drought periods. The Tribe has a consumptive right to water in the amount of 5,828 acre-feet per year, however, infrastructure to store that water for beneficial use does not yet exist.
Active negotiations between the Tule River Tribe, South Tule Independent Ditch Company, and the Tule River Association regarding the Tribe’s water needs began in 1998. A settlement agreement (The Tule River Tribe Reserved Water Rights Settlement Agreement) was finally reached in 2007. This agreement seeks to settle damage claims against the United States and provide adequate and reliable water and land to support a sustainable homeland for the Tribe and its members.
The Tribe proposes to construct a dam, which would impound a 5,000-acre-foot reservoir, as well as a new or expanded water treatment plant and water conveyance pipeline. This project is supported by the City of Porterville, Tulare County, the Tule River Association, the South Tule Independent Ditch Company and a variety of other local and federal interest groups. A Water Settlement Technical Report was conducted in June 2013 to provide a technical foundation for project construction.
June 2018 C-36
Section D Water Supply, Demand and Water Budget
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
The Tule River Basin IRWM planning area is approximately 673 square miles and is situated within The Tule Subbasin of the San Juaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The region supports both urban and agricultural water demands. A balance between water supply and water demand is necessary for economic and ecologic sustainability.
D.1 Introduction
This section of the Tule River Basin IRWMP provides a discussion and analysis of the current and projected water supply and demand for the Tule River Basin IRWM planning area from 2020-2040. The section begins with a discussion of surface water supplies and water demand for each water management district. This is followed by an analysis of groundwater supply, which is discussed at a regional level due to the shared nature of groundwater resources. The section concludes with a summary of the region’s water supply demand balance, and a discussion of future impacts on the water budget.
D.1.1 Use of IRWM Plan for Determining Adequacy of Water Supplies Under Senate Bill 610 and 221
SB 221 requires all cities and counties to include, as a condition in their approval of a Senate Bill 221 tentative subdivision map for a large residential subdivision, that a sufficient water supply must be available. SB 610 expanded the requirement for public water systems to prepare water supply Senate Bill 610 assessments for development projects. Specifically, the bill increases the number of projects subject to a water supply assessment and compliance with SB 221.
This section does not make any conclusions on the adequacy of water supplies to meet water demands, but does discuss likely deficiencies and probable actions. The rigor of analysis required as part of the required study of sustainable water supplies under Senate Bills 610 and 221 for new developments should be done as a separate evaluation supported by the latest local UWMPs and groundwater management plans.
D.2 Water Management Districts
D.2.1 Lower Tule River Irrigation District
The Lower Tule River Irrigation District is one of the largest irrigation districts in the State of California. The district is bordered by the Pixley Irrigation District to the south, the Porterville Irrigation District to the East, and the Saucelito Irrigation District on the southeast corner. As of 2010, the Tule River Irrigation District is comprised 103,086 acres, 84,169 of which are under irrigated agricultural use. The following
June 2018 D-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
water supply and demand data was taken from the 2012 Lower Tule River Irrigation District Water Management Plan and the 2017 Central Valley Project Operations Report.
Surface Water Supply
The majority of surface water supply within the district is derived from water diversions from the Friant- Kern Canal under two separate long term surface water contracts (Class 1 and Class 2) with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation via the Central Valley Project. The district has a maximum entitlement of 61,200 AF/Year under the class 1 Contract and 238,000 AF/Year under the Class 2 Contract. The amount of water delivered varies significantly depending on total water availability. In a normal water year, CVP typically delivers much less than the maximum contracted amount. For example, from 2001-2010, the average amount of water supplied per year to the District through Class 1 and 2 Contracts was 120,166 AF. This supply dipped to zero at the peak of the California drought (2015) but increased to the full contract allocation in 2017.
In addition to Federal Agricultural Water entitlements, the District has Tule River Rights based on pre- 1914 water rights. The water received from Lake Success is associated with the District’s Tule River Rights. The average annual yield of those combined rights is approximately 70,000 AF per year. However, these water rights are currently impaired by limited storage conditions behind Success Dam which are limited by the Army Corps of Engineers due to concerns about the safety of the dam. The actual average supply from this source from 2001-2010 was 57,891 AF/Year, however supply varies greatly from year to year.
Table D-1. Lower Tule River Irrigation District Surface Water Supplies
Water Supply Source AF/Year (2010 Data) AF/Year (Average 2001-2010) Federal Agricultural Water 171,428 120,166 Local Surface Water 89,215 57,891 Transferred Water 8,100 8,100* Total 268,743 178,057
Demand
Because there are no urban water users within the District, 100% of water demand is due to agriculture. There are 209 farms and 610 total delivery points within the district. Corn is the most dominant crop cultivated by farms within the district and has an average evapotranspiration rate of 3.4 acre-feet per acre. Distribution losses are almost entirely due to seepage, which is when water percolates from canals and other conveyance systems into the surrounding soil.
Table D-2. Lower Tule River Irrigation District Water Demand (2010 Data)
Demand Source AF/Year (2010 Data) Applied Crop Water Use 367,038 Distribution Losses 105,259 Total 472,297
June 2018 D-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.2.2 Pixley Irrigation District
The Pixley Irrigation District was formed in 1958 to promote flood control and secure supplemental irrigation water supply from the Federal Central Valley Project and other agencies. Pixley Irrigation district is bordered by the Lower Tule River Irrigation District to the north and Saucelito Irrigation District to the east. The district covers 69,571 acres, 59,283 of which are under irrigated agricultural uses.
The following water supply and demand data was taken from the 2012 Lower Tule River Irrigation District Water Management Plan and the 2017 Central Valley Project Operations Report.
Surface Water Supply
The Pixley Irrigation District contains very limited surface water supplies, Water transfers from the Lower Tule River and Porterville Irrigation Districts are the primary source of surface water supply in the Pixley district. Combined, these districts supplied 30,296 AF of water in 2010.
In addition to water transfers from other districts, Deer Creek, a local surface water resource, provides a small contribution to the districts water supply. Local surface water from Deer Creek supplied an average of 2,156 AF/Year between 2001 and 2010.
The Pixley Irrigation District documents a maximum annual entitlement of 31,102 AF/Year with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation via the Central Valley Project in its 2012 Water Management Plan. However, the plan records zero delivery from this source between 2001 and 2010.
Table D-3: Pixley Irrigation District Surface Water Supplies
Surface Water Supply Source AF/Year (2010 Data) AF/Year (Average 2001-2010) Water Transfers 30,296 30,2961 Local Surface Water 1,000 2,165 Total 31,296 32,4611 *2010 water transfer data is used as 2001-2010 average in calculation of total due to data availability.
Demand
As an irrigation district, water demands are entirely related to agriculture. The district contains 59,283 irrigated acres with a total of 94 separate farms and 166 water delivery points. Corn is the most dominant crop cultivated by farms within the district and has an average evapotranspiration rate of 3.4 acre-feet per acre. Distribution losses contribute to water demand within the district. Distribution losses are almost entirely due to seepage, which is when water percolates from canals and other conveyance systems into the surrounding soil.
Table D-4. Pixley Irrigation District Water Demand (2010 Data)
Demand Source AF/Year Applied Crop Water Use 182,746 Distribution Losses 11,503 Total 194,249
June 2018 D-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.2.3 Porterville Irrigation District
The Porterville Irrigation District was formed in 1949 to establish a water supply contract from the Central Valley Project. The district is located west of the City of Porterville, east of the Lower Tule River Irrigation District, and north of the Saucelito Irrigation District. The district covers approximately 16,900 acres, 12,672 of which are under irrigated agricultural uses. The following water supply and demand data was taken from the 2012 Porterville Irrigation District Agricultural Water Management Plan.
Surface Water Supply
The majority of surface water supply within the district is derived from water diversions from the Friant- Kern Canal under two separate long-term surface water contracts (Class 1 and Class 2) with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation via the Central Valley Project. The district has a maximum entitlement of 16,000 AF/Year under the class 1 Contract and 30,000 AF/Year under the Class 2 Contract.
The amount of water delivered varies significantly depending on total water availability. In a normal water year, CVP typically delivers much less than the maximum contracted amount. For example, from 2001- 2010, the average amount of water supplied per year to the District through Class 1 and 2 Contracts was 19,856 acre-feet. This supply dipped to zero at the peak of the California drought (2015) but increased to the full contract allocation in 2017. Recirculated water from the Central Valley Project provided a small contribution to total water supply in 2010.
In addition to Federal Agricultural Water entitlements, the District has Tule River Rights based on pre- 1914 water rights. The district is contracted 10,000 acre-feet per year, however these water rights are currently impaired by limited storage conditions behind Success Dam which are limited by the Army Corps of Engineers due to concerns about the safety of the dam. Thus, actual supply varies greatly from year to year. This source supplied an average of 6,682 acre-feet per year between 2001 and 2010.
Table D-5: Porterville Irrigation District Surface Water Supply
Surface Water Supply Source AF/Year (2010 Data) AF/Year (Average 2001-2010) Federal Agricultural Water 12,814 19,856 Local Surface Water 6,978 6,682 (Tule River) Other* (Recirculation Water) 941 94 Total 20,733 26,631 *“Other” water was CVP recirculation water that was delivered to the District during the months of August 2010 and September 2010.
Demand
Because there are no urban water users within the Irrigation District, 100% of water demand is due to agriculture. There are 91 farms and 138 total delivery points within the district. Walnuts are the most dominant crop cultivated by farms within the district and have an average evapotranspiration rate of 2.7 acre-feet per acre.
June 2018 D-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
Water transfers to the Pixley Irrigation District are a significant contributor to water demand within the district. Water transfers are used to support agricultural production in the neighboring district and totaled 17,004 acre-feet in 2010.
Distribution losses also contribute to total water demand within the district. Water loss during distribution is entirely due to seepage, which is when water percolates from canals and other conveyance systems into the surrounding soil. The Porterville Irrigation District Water Management Plan estimates seepage loss using average flow measurements throughout the distribution system.
Table D-6: Porterville Irrigation District Water Demand
Demand Source AF/Year (2010 Data) Applied Crop Water Use 44,466 Transfers (To Pixley Irrigation 17,004 District) Distribution Losses 5,529 Total 66,999
D.2.4 Saucelito Irrigation District
The Saucelito Irrigation District was formed in 1941 to supply agricultural water to district lands. The district is located east of the Pixley Irrigation District, south of the Porterville and Lower Tule River Irrigation Districts and covers approximately 19,737 acres. The Saucelito Irrigation District is entirely composed of agricultural users. The following water supply and demand data was taken from the 2012 Saucelito Irrigation District Agricultural Water Management Plan.
Surface Water Supply
The majority of surface water supply within the district is derived from water diversions from the Friant- Kern Canal under two separate long-term surface water contracts (Class 1 and Class 2) with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation via the Central Valley Project. The district has a maximum entitlement of 21,200 AF/Year under the class 1 Contract and 32,800 AF/Year under the Class 2 Contract.
The amount of water delivered varies significantly depending on total water availability. In a normal water year, CVP typically delivers much less than the maximum contracted amount. For example, from 2001- 2010, the average amount of water supplied per year to the District through Class 1 and 2 Contracts was 29,734 AF. This supply dipped to zero at the peak of the California drought (2015) but increased to the full contract allocation in 2017. Local Surface Water also provides a small annual contribution to the District’s water supply.
In 2010, irregular water supplies totaling 5,202 acre-feet were created through recovered water systems and transfers from other districts.
June 2018 D-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
Table D-7: Saucelito Irrigation District Surface Water Supplies
Surface Water Supply Source AF/Year (2010 Data) AF/Year (Average 2001-2010) Federal Agricultural Water 36,934 29,734 Local Surface Water 413 338 Other* 5,202 520 Total 42,549 30,592
*“Other water” was transfers in in the amounts of 3,034 acre-feet and 1,200 acre-feet and Recovered Water Account supplies in the amounts of 516 AF and 452 AF.
Demand
Because there are no urban water users within the District, 100% of water demand is due to agriculture. There are 88 farms and 215 total delivery points within the district. Grapes are the most dominant crop cultivated within the district. Grapes have an average evapotranspiration rate of 2.7 acre-feet per acre and account for 3,476 acres within the district.
Distribution losses are entirely due to seepage, which is when water percolates from canals and other conveyance systems into the surrounding soil. The Saucelito Irrigation District Water Management Plan acknowledges that seepage does occur, but identifies it as a source of groundwater replenishment.
Table D-8: Saucelito Irrigation District Water Demand
Demand Source AF/Year (2010 Data) Applied Crop Water Use 52,727 Distribution losses 372 Total 53,099
D.2.5 Tea Pot Dome Water District
The Tea Pot Dome Water District was formed in 1954 and is located south of the City of Porterville and North of the Terra Bella Irrigation District. The district covers approximately 3,481 acres, 3,282 of which are under irrigated agricultural use. All water use within the district is designated as agricultural.
The following water supply and demand data was taken from the 2011 Tea Pot Dome Water District Water Management Plan.
Surface Water Supply
All surface water is supplied to the district through water diversions from the Friant-Kern Canal under long term surface water contracts with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation via the Central Valley Project. The district has a maximum entitlement of 7,500 AF/Year under this contract, however actual water deliveries are usually lower than the maximum entitlement and dependent on water availability. For example, the district received an average of 6,120 acre-feet per year between 2001 and 2011. Federal agricultural
June 2018 D-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
surface water supplies were not delivered at the peak of the California drought (2015), however deliveries increased to the full contract allocation in 2017.
Table D-9: Tea Pot Dome Surface Water Supply
Surface Water Supply Source AF/Year (2010 Data) AF/Year (Average 2001-2010) Federal Agricultural Water 5,944 6,128 Total 5,944 6,128
Demand
Because there are no urban water users within the District, 100% of water demand is due to agriculture. There are 65 farms and 125 total delivery points within the district. Citrus is the most dominant crop cultivated within the district. Citrus has an average evapotranspiration rate of 3.4 acre-feet per acre and accounts for 2,997 acres within the district.
Distribution losses are entirely due to seepage, which is when water percolates from canals and other conveyance systems into the surrounding soil. The Tea Pot Dome Water District Water Management Plan estimates a 2% loss from seepage for every 100 feet of pipe.
Table D-10. Tea Pot Dome Water Management District Water Demand
Demand Source AF/Year (2010 Data) Applied Crop Water Use 8,038 Distribution losses 23 Total 8,061
D.2.6 Terra Bella Irrigation District
The Terra Bella Irrigation District was formed in 1915 to obtain agricultural water for district lands. The district is located in the south-east corner of the IRWM planning area and covers approximately 13,962 acres, 12,739 of which are under irrigated agricultural use. The district serves both urban and agricultural users. The following water supply and demand data was taken from the 2013 Terra Bella Irrigation District Agricultural Water Management Plan.
Surface Water Supply
Surface water supplies to the Terra Bella Irrigation District are entirely composed of water diverted from the Friant-Kern Canal under two separate long-term surface water contracts (Class 1 and Class 2) with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation via the Central Valley Project. The district has a maximum entitlement of 29,000 AF/Year under the class 1 Contract and 1,200 AF/Year under the Class 2 Contract. Federal urban deliveries are made under these contracts.
June 2018 D-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
The amount of water delivered per year varies significantly depending on total water availability. In a normal water year, CVP typically delivers much less than the maximum contracted amount. For example, federal contracts supplied an average of 18,129 acre-feet of agricultural water and 1,044 acre-feet of urban water per year from 2001-2010. This supply dipped to zero at the peak of the California drought (2015) but increased to the full contract allocation in 2017.
Table D-11: Terra Bella Irrigation District Surface Water Supply
Surface Water Supply Source AF/Year (2010 Data) AF/Year (Average 2001-2010) Federal Urban Water 1,182 1,044 Federal Agricultural Water 15,985 18,129 Local Surface Water
Other (Transport)* 12,980 1,298 Total 30,147 20,472 * “Other” water was Federal CVP contract supply.
Demand
The Terra Bella Irrigation District supports both urban and agricultural water demands. The majority of water demand is due to agricultural land use. The district contains 1,222 farms and 1,473 total delivery points. Citrus is the primary crop cultivated within the district and has an average evapotranspiration rate of 3.4 acre-feet per acre.
In addition to agricultural water demand, urban users contribute to the district’s total water demand. There are 668 urban connections. All urban connections are metered, which encourages water conservation.
The district does not quantify any distribution losses. The Districts Water Management Plan cites continuous maintenance and system repair as sufficient measures to reduce distribution losses to less than significant levels.
Table D-12: Terra Bella Irrigation District Water Demand
Demand Source AF/Year (2010 Data) Applied Crop Water Use 30,475 Urban Use (Single Family- 1,182 Residential) Total 31,657
June 2018 D-8 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.2.7 Porterville (2015 Urban Water Management Plan)
The City of Porterville is the only incorporated city within the IRWMP region. The Porterville Urban Water Management Plan was adopted in 2010 and updated in 2014. The Porterville Urban Planning area covers 36,341 acres and includes the city as well as unincorporated areas outside the city that are of interest for long-term planning. The following water supply and demand data was taken from the 2015 City of Porterville Urban Water Management Plan.
Surface Water Supply
The City of Porterville Urban Water Management Planning Area does not receive any supplies from surface water and depends entirely on groundwater. However, the City anticipates purchasing surface water from Porterville Irrigation District and receiving surface water transfers in the future.
Demand
The City of Porterville Urban Water Management Planning Area supports a variety of urban water uses. Future demand was projected based on general plan land uses, projected growth rates, and historic demands.
Table D-13: City of Porterville Water Demand
Demand Source AF/Year (2010 Data) Single Family 7,051 Multi-Family 1,788 Commercial/Institutional 2,007 Industrial 78 Landscape Irrigation 410 Other 427 Agricultural Irrigation 0 System Losses 619 Total 12,380
June 2018 D-9 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.2.8 Unincorporated Urban Community Service Districts
There are eight unincorporated urban communities within the IRWMP region. Unincorporated communities cover 50 square miles within the IRWM planning area and make up 30% or the region’s total population. Local Community Service Districts own and operate private wells which are used to provide water for residential, commercial, and industrial uses. The unincorporated communities located within the IRWMP region are as follows:
• East Porterville • Woodville • Terra Bella • Poplar • Tipton • Allensworth • Pixley • Teviston
Surface Water Supply
Unincorporated urban communities within the IRWMP region do not receive any surface water supplies because surface water is used to meet agricultural water demands. Instead, these communities derive water resources entirely from the Tule Sub Basin.
Demand
Water demand for unincorporated communities within the IRWMP region is difficult to quantify because most water hookups are unmetered and well production is generally unmeasured. This makes it impossible to accurately determine the community’s water use. Additionally, water use data that is available is out of date and based on much smaller populations. For this reason, water demand was estimated for each community district by multiplying the average water use per capita per day as identified in Tulare County General Plan (160 gallons per capita per day) with the community’s 2010 population.
Table D-14: Urban water demand in unincorporated communities within the IRWMP region.
Urban Water Demand Community Population Per Capita Water Use Community Community Water Use Community (2010) (Gallons Per Day) Water Use (Gallons Per Year) Water Use (Gallons Per Day) (Ac-Ft Per Year)
East Porterville 7331 160 1172960 428130400 1314 Terra Bella 3310 160 529600 193304000 593 Tipton 2543 160 406880 148511200 456 Pixley 3310 160 529600 193304000 593 Woodville 1740 160 278400 101616000 312 Poplar 2470 160 395200 144248000 443 Allensworth 471 160 75360 27506400 84 Teviston 1214 160 194240 70897600 218
Total 30926 3582240 1307517600 4013
June 2018 D-10 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.3 Groundwater Supply: The Tule Sub Basin
All Water Management Districts within the IRWM planning area receive groundwater supplies from the Tule Basin, a Subbasin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. Because the Sub basin is shared by IRWMP member districts, groundwater supply will be discussed with regard to the IRWMP region as a whole.
The basin is composed of two extensive and usable groundwater aquifers. The upper aquifer is unconfined and highly receptive to recharge from locations throughout the District extending east into the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The lower aquifer is confined under the Corcoran Clay layer and can be effectively recharged from areas east of Highway 99.
The Tule River is the primary source of groundwater replenishment within the Lower Tule River Irrigation District. Recharge is accomplished primarily by seepage from the Tule River channels and from distribution canals, by deep percolation from irrigation, and by artificial percolation from spreading basins.
Total groundwater supply was determined using safe yield. The safe yield of a groundwater basin is the rate at which groundwater can be extracted without causing long-term water level decline. Safe yield is generally considered equal to the average replenishment rate of the basin from natural and artificial recharge. Using safe yield, rather than actual yield, to determine average annual groundwater supply will result in a responsible water budget that can be used to develop sustainable groundwater management practices.
A Water Supply Evaluation Report was prepared in 2009 for the Tulare County General Plan 2030 update. This report estimates the basin’s natural recharge at 34,400 acre-feet per year and applied water recharge at 201,000 acre-feet per year. These values were used to estimate the basin’s safe yield at 235,400 acre- feet per year.
Figure D-1. Lines of Equal Elevation of Water in Wells, Unconfined Aquifer (Spring 2010)
June 2018 D-11 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.4 Regional Supply and Demand Balance
The difference between supply and demand is demonstrative of demand exceeding supply. This finding is confirmed by the declining groundwater table within the DCTRA IRWMP area. Although water management districts within the IRWMP region have been able to meet their water demands using groundwater thus far, they will not be able to do so indefinitely at the current rate of groundwater extraction.
Table D-15. Table summarizing of the region’s water supply and demand balance.
Water Supply-Demand Balance Average Groundwater Groundwater % of Total Total Water Surface Supply Demand Groundwater Water Supply Water (Based on (District Demand Demand Demand Supplies Tule Basin Demand - (2010 Balance (2001- Safe Yield, District Data, (AF/Year) 2010) AF/Year)* Surface AF/Year) Supply) Lower Tule River ID 178,057 126,299 294,240 53.65% 472,297 -167,941 Pixley ID 32,461 69,446 161,788 29.50% 194,249 -92,342 Porterville ID 26,631 17,327 40,368 7.36% 66,999 -23,041 Saucelito ID 30,592 9,661 22,507 4.10% 53,099 -12,846 Tea Pot Dome WD 6,128 830 1,933 0.35% 8,061 -1,103 Terra Bella ID 20,472 4,801 11,185 2.04% 31,657 -6,384 City of Porterville 0 5,314 12,380 2.26% 12,380 -7,066 East Porterville 0 564 1,314 0.24% 1,314 -750 Terra Bella 0 255 593 0.11% 593 -338 Tipton 0 196 456 0.08% 456 -260 Pixley 0 255 593 0.11% 593 -338 Woodville 0 134 312 0.06% 312 -178 Poplar 0 190 443 0.08% 443 -253 Allensworth 0 36 84 0.02% 84 -48 Teviston 0 94 218 0.04% 218 -124 IRWMP Region 294,341 235,400 548,414 100.00% 842,755 -313,014
*Each district’s groundwater supply values are based on the district’s percentage of total groundwater demand in relationship with the Tule Basin’s safe yield and was calculated using the following equation:
=
𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 − 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝑖𝑖𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑥𝑥 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑛𝑛 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 − 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ** Tule Sub Basin safe yield, as identified in the 2009 Water Supply Evaluation Report prepared for the 2030 Tulare County General Plan.
June 2018 D-12 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.5 Water Supplies and Demand Through 2040
Ensuring water availability into the future is a primary objective of this IRWMP. By evaluating the factors that influence water use, it is possible to predict future water supply and demand. Although all water supply and demand predictions are inherently uncertain and based on assumptions, the practice of evaluating future water supply and demand encourages water resource managers to make decisions based on their long-term benefits. This section was developed to satisfy the 2016 IRWMP Guideline requirement to develop a water budget with a 20 year planning horizon. The section is organized in the following order:
• Projected Urban Water Demand • Projected Agriculture Demand • Predicted Changes to Regional Water Supply • Plan to Reduce Dependence on the San Joaquin Delta Supply
D.5.1 Projected Urban Water Demand
There is one incorporated and nine unincorporated urban areas within the IRWM planning area. Future water demand for these areas is based on assumed growth rate and per capita water use. Average per capita water use values were assumed based on the Tulare County General Plan, which identifies an average of 160 gallons per capita per day as the average per capita water use within the county. Predicted growth rates are based off information provided in the Tulare County and City of Porterville General Plans. The average annual growth rate for unincorporated communities used in this analysis was taken from the 2010 Tulare County General Plan Background Report, which identifies a 1.3% projected annual growth rate for unincorporated areas of Tulare County. The average annual growth rate for the City of Porterville was provided by the City of Porterville General Plan, which predicts that the city’s population will grow by 3.7% annually.
Based on these annual average growth rates, the IRWMP region’s population is expected to grow from 76,554 to 194,080 between 2010 and 2040. As shown in figure D-2, this increase in population will have large impact on urban water demand. To ensure adequate water supplies to support future population growth, water availability should be taken into account when considering new urban development projects within the IRWMP region.
June 2018 D-13 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
Table D-16: Projected Urban water demand in Acre-Feet / year through 2040.
Projected Urban Water Demand (Acre-Feet/Year) Year 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Porterville 9,708 11,641 13,960 16,741 20,076 24,076 28,872 East 1,314 1,402 1,495 1,595 1,701 1,815 1,936 Porterville
Terra Bella 593 633 675 720 768 819 874 Tipton 456 486 519 553 590 629 671 Pixley 593 633 675 720 768 819 874 Woodville 312 333 355 379 404 431 459 Poplar 443 472 504 537 573 611 652 Allensworth 84 90 96 102 109 117 124 Teviston 218 232 248 264 282 301 321 Total 13,720 15,922 18,526 21,612 25,272 29,618 34,784
Projected Urban Water Demand 40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000 Feet/Year - 15,000 Acre 10,000
5,000
- 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Porterville East Porterville Terra Bella Tipton Pixley Woodville Poplar Allensworth Teviston
Figure D-2. Projected future urban water demand in Acre-Feet/year through 2040 based on expected population growth
June 2018 D-14 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
D.5.2 Projected Agricultural Water Demand
Unlike urban water demand, agricultural water demand is not directly related to population size. Instead, agricultural water demand depends on a multitude of variables, including crop type, irrigation efficiency, temperature, precipitation, etc. Any combination of these variables would have a different impact on agricultural water demand. For this reason, it is very difficult to predict future agricultural water demands with accuracy.
There are a few factors that could decrease future agricultural water demand. Regional population growth would likely lead to decreased agricultural water demand as agricultural lands are converted for urban use. Additionally, increased irrigation efficiency resulting from technological advances would further reduce agricultural water demand. These variables and their impacts on agricultural water demand are somewhat predictable, however changes in crop type, precipitation, or temperature could either increase or decrease future agricultural water demand from year to year.
While some factors may decrease future agricultural water demand, it is more likely that climate change will increase agricultural water demand while making water supply more unreliable. The following provides a summary of likely climate change impacts on agricultural water demand; however, a more in- depth discussion is available in Section O – Climate Change.
• Increased temperatures would result in increased evapotranspiration rates and increased crop water demand. This, in conjunction with extreme drought periods, would increase the amount of applied water needed to support crops. • Extreme storm events are also anticipated as a result of climate change. Although heavy rains could provide a temporary increase in water supply, it is more likely that large amounts of water would be lost from evaporation as timing would be insufficient for crops to utilize it.
Agricultural water use creates the vast majority of water demand within the region. Ensuring that adequate supplies exist to meet this demand is a primary objective of this IRWMP. For this reason, changes in agricultural water demand as a result of climate change or other factors should be monitored closely as part of IRWMP implementation.
D.5.3 Predicted Changes to Regional Water Supply
As previously discussed, climate change is anticipated to have significant impacts on regional water supply. The following provides a summary of likely climate change impacts on regional water supply; however, a more in-depth discussion is available in Section O – Climate Change.
• Reduced snow melt would result in further reduction of water supply during warmer months and limit the reliability of water flow from the Tule River and Deer Creek. This would increase reliance on groundwater resources, which are already in overdraft to support crops. • Extended drought events could create severe water shortages for both agricultural and urban water users. • Extreme storm events as a result of climate change could bring heavy rains that temporarily increase water supply. However, it is likely that large amounts of water would be lost from evaporation as timing would be insufficient for groundwater recharge to occur.
June 2018 D-15 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
• Salt water intrusion into the San Joaquin Delta as a result of sea level rise could lead to reductions in federally contracted water supplies.
D.5.4 Plan to Reduce Dependence on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Supply
As shown in figure D-3, water that is federally contracted from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta addresses approximately 24% of the region’s total water demand. Decreasing dependence on the delta will promote sustainable water use and increase regional and state resilience to climate change impacts. Increasing groundwater and local surface water supplies while decreasing water demands will lead to decreased dependence on the delta.
REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES Federal Water 24%
Local Surface Water Groundwate 8% r 68%
Figure D-3: Water supply sources
Groundwater supplies can be increased through conjunctive use of local surface and groundwater resources. Conjunctive use programs involve the maximum utilization of water resources by using excess surface water to replenish groundwater in wet years, which can then be used to supplement water supplies in dry years. Increasing groundwater recharge opportunities will increase the Tule Sub basin’s safe yield while also reducing dependence on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Existing policies promote IRWMP member districts to preserve and enhance conjunctive use opportunities by developing water banking arrangements with other agencies and utilizing available groundwater storage capacity during wet years.
While local surface water supplies are mostly dependent on precipitation and snowmelt, there are a few ways in which they can be optimized. Increasing surface water storage, particularly during wet years, could increase water supply availability and decrease dependence on the delta. One opportunity for this is the expansion of Success Reservoir. Success Dam is used to control the flow of the Tule River, which is a primary local surface water supply. Increasing the capacity of Success Reservoir could allow for larger surface water distributions downstream. Surface water could also be increased using precipitation enhancement techniques such as cloud seeding to increase precipitation. This would increase surface water supplies while also adding to groundwater recharge.
June 2018 D-16 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section D – Water Supply, Demand, and Water Budget
Water demand is the component of the water budget that can be most influenced through infrastructure and policy. Decreasing water demand would directly decrease dependence on the San Joaquin Delta water supply. Major ways to reduce regional water demand could include the installation of meters to all water hookups in unincorporated communities and requiring private well owners to measure their well production. Presently, water meters are only required for new development projects or transfer of ownership. Increasingly efficient water delivery systems as a result of technological advances will also reduce regional water demand and dependence on the delta.
It should be said, however, that agriculture makes up a large majority of the region’s total water demand, and the region produces far more agriculture than it consumes. The central valley produces 8% of the nation’s total agricultural output and accounts for only 0.47% of the nation’s land area. For this reason, it is unlikely that the region will be completely self-sufficient with regard to water while it is a primary supplier of food for areas outside the region. However, efforts to increase local water supplies will be supported.
June 2018 D-17
Section E Goals and Objectives
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Section E – Goals and Objectives
E.1 Introduction
This section identifies the Tule River Basin IRWM Plan’s Vision, Goals, and Objectives. The intent of this section is to establish the intent of the Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP), and to demonstrate which regional water management issues the IRWMP is designed to address.
The IRWMP goals and objectives provide a basis for decision making and are used to evaluate project benefits of IRWMP Projects and Programs. The goals and objectives are based on input and from the Regional Water Management Group (RWMG), the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority (DCTRA), and other Interested Stakeholders. The Goals and Objectives:
• Focus the IRWM Plan • Provide a basis for determining the most appropriate resource management strategies for the Region • Are used to evaluate project benefits • Guide development and implementation of IRWM project/program
IRWM Vision: Sustain Agricultural, Urban and Ecological Viability through Effective Water Management
E.2 Process and Determination of IRWM Plan Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives for the IRWMP were formulated in the multiple meetings of the Tule River Basin IRWMP Stakeholders Advisory Group meetings. These objectives have been ratified by the Board of Directors of the Tule River Basin IRWM Governing Board, acting as the lead initial role in preparing the Tule River IRWMP, based on further recommendation of its Advisory Committee.
June 2018 E-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
E.2.1 Stakeholder Input: Identifying Critical Water Issues
The Tule River Basin IRWM Advisory Committee met several times to identify key issues that would assist in the development of the IRWMP goals and objectives. The Advisory Committee involved in this process are those representatives from the public agencies, water districts, communities, and the County within the Tule River Basin. The 3 most critical issues identified by the Advisory Committee were:
• Storm water Management • Declining groundwater levels • Groundwater quality
E.2.2 Consistency with Applicable Resource Documents and Management Plans
With the stakeholder-identified critical water resource issues in mind, the 2017 IRWM Plan utilizes a number of resource and guidance documents to develop the Goals and Objectives. Additionally, the IRWM Plan considers and/or seeks consistency with the following:
• DWR IRWM Guidelines (July 2016) • Groundwater Quality Control Plan for The Tule River Basin (September 2016) • Tulare Basin Groundwater Management Plan (July 2012) • California Water Action Plan (Updated 2016) • California Water Code
The 2016 guidelines specifically require that all IRWM Plans consider overarching goals of the Tule Basin Basin Water Quality Coalition Plans, the California Water Code, and those of the state led-documents are briefly described below.
DWR IRWM Guidelines (July 2016)
Release of the 2016 IRWM Program Guidelines provided the lead document for the approach and content required for the Region’s IRWM Plan. The Guidelines reflect current legislation impacting what should be included in, and funded under, IRWM Plans throughout the state of California. The 2016 IRWM Program Guidelines discuss specific elements that must be included in an IRWM Plan.
June 2018 E-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Table E-1. How IRWM Plan meets requirements for objectives set by the 2016 DWR IRWM Guidelines.
How the IRWM Plan Addresses the 2016 DWR IRWM Guidelines Requirements for Objectives Requirement IRWM Plan must clearly present Plan Objectives and Section E clearly describes the process by which describe the process used to develop the objectives. IRWMP Objectives were developed. Plan objectives must address major water related issues Section E describes how major water related and conflicts of the region. issues and conflicts in the region were identified RWMG’s must consider the objectives in the appropriate Tables E-2 through E-4 describe how objectives basin plan or plans and strategies to meet applicable in other relevant regional plans were used to water quality standards, Water Code §10541.(e)(2). shape IRWMP projects and programs. Table E-5 provides the intended qualitative and Objectives must be measurable by some practical means quantitative metrics, as appropriate and so achievement of objectives can be monitored. practical, for each objective. Objectives may be prioritized for the Region and must Section E provides an explanation as to why contain an explanation of the prioritization or reason why objective prioritization was not utilized in this objectives are prioritized. IRWMP. Objectives 10, 11, and 12 seek to increase Address adapting to changes in the amount, intensity, understanding of regional climate change timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge. impacts and develop strategies to adapt to these impacts. Objectives 10 and 11 seek to increase Consider the effects of sea level rise (SLR) on water supply understanding of climate change impacts and conditions and identify suitable adaptation measures. develop strategies to adapt to these impacts. Objective 12 seeks to limit GHG emissions through implementation of hydroelectric energy Reduce energy consumption, especially the energy generation facilities. Objectives 13, 14, 15 seek embedded in water use, and ultimately reducing GHG to reduce energy consumption by reducing emissions. water demand and increasing efficiency of water use. Objective 12 seeks to limit GHG emissions Consider, where practical, the strategies adopted by through implementation of hydroelectric energy California Air Resources Board (CARB) in its AB 32 Scoping generation facilities. Objectives 13, 14, 15 seek Plan, when evaluating different ways to meet IRWM plan to reduce energy consumption by reducing objectives. water demand and increasing efficiency of water use. Objectives 1 and 2 seek to protect, restore, and regenerate aquatic, riparian, and native habitats Consider options for carbon sequestration and using in the region, which would result in increased renewable energy where such options are integrally tied carbon sequestration. Objective 12 seeks to to supporting IRWM Plan objectives. increase renewable energy options through implementation of hydroelectric energy generation facilities.
June 2018 E-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Deer Creek and Tule River Authority Groundwater Management Plan (2012)
The DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan was first established by member agencies of the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority (DCTRA) in 1995 to collectively monitor, manage, and implement groundwater activities by the participants of the DCTRA. The latest update to the Tule Basin Groundwater Management Plan occurred in 2012. The objectives of the 2012 Tule Basin Groundwater Management Plan are:
• To promote and realize groundwater resource protection • To facilitate groundwater resource sustainability • To develop groundwater resource understanding • To develop groundwater basin understanding • To promote and facilitate information dissemination regarding the groundwater resource
Table E-2. How IRWMP Meets 2012 Tule Basin Groundwater Management Plan Objectives
2012 Tule Basin Groundwater Management Plan How the IRWM Plan Meets the Objectives Objectives To promote and realize groundwater resource Objectives 6, 7, 8 and 9 seek to limit groundwater protection contamination. Objectives 13, 14 and 15 seek to implement strategies to reduce water demand and increase water use To facilitate groundwater resource sustainability efficiency. These strategies are critical to achieving groundwater sustainability.
To develop groundwater resource understanding
To develop groundwater basin understanding Objective 14 seeks to increase knowledge and understanding of all groundwater related conditions. To promote and facilitate information dissemination regarding the groundwater resource
California Water Code
The California Water Code is the primary legislation pertaining to water management in California. However, other California legislation relevant to IRWMP guideline compliance were also considered in the development of IRWMP goals and objectives. The laws necessary to comply with IRWMP guidelines are summarized below and description of how the IRWMP objectives comply with the California Water Code is presented in Table E-3.
June 2018 E-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Table E-3. Summary of California Water Codes
20x2020: In February 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger set a goal of a 20 percent reduction in per capita urban water use by the year 2020 (20x2020). Actions toward the 20x2020 goal were furthered by the passage of Senate Bill SBx7-7 in November 2009, which amended the CWC to contain provisions not only to improve urban water use efficiency, but to improve agricultural water use efficiency as well. California Water Code §10540 (c): In September 2011, the senate passed §10540 (c). §10540 (c) states that, at minimum, all IRWM Plans shall address the CWC requirements listed in Table E-4 AB 685: AB 685 Establishes State Policy that every human being has that right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes. California Water Code §10541: California Water Code §10541 was passed in September 2014 and requires that IRWM regions with nitrate, arsenic, perchlorate, or hexavalent chromium contamination to include specific information. Additionally, this legislation requires the evaluation of the adaptability of water management systems in a region to climate change in all IRWM Plans. California Water Code §10562: SB 985 (Pavley, Chapter 555, Statues 2014) – Water Code §10562 – requires the development of a stormwater resource plan and compliance with these provisions to receive grants for stormwater and dry weather runoff capture projects from a bond act approved by voters after January 1, 2014 AB 1739, SB 1168, SB 1319: AB 1739, SB 1168, and SB 1319 are collectively referred to as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA allows local agencies to customize groundwater sustainability plans to their regional economic and environmental needs. SGMA creates a framework for sustainable, local groundwater management by requiring local agencies to establish a new governance structure, known as Groundwater Sustainability Agencies, prior to developing groundwater sustainability plans for groundwater basins or sub-basins. Water Code §10551: SB 208 (Lara, Chapter 675, Statues 2015) – Water Code §10551 – requires a Resource Water Management Group (RWMG), within 90 days of notice that a grant has been awarded, to provide DWR with a list of projects that benefit a DAC or where the project proponent is a nonprofit organization or a DAC. Within 60 days of receiving the project information, DWR is to provide advanced payment of 50% of the grant award AB 52: AB 52 (Gatto, Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014) – Public Resources Code §21080.3.1 – requires the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lead agency to consider project effects on Tribal cultural resources and to conduct consultation with California Native American Tribes Executive Order B-29-15: Executive Order B-29-15 requires agricultural water suppliers that supply water to more than 25,000 acres to include in their required 2015 Agricultural Water Management Plans (AWMP) a detailed drought Proposition 1 2016 IRWM Program Guidelines Page 7 management plan that describes the actions and measures the supplier will take to manage water demand during drought.
June 2018 E-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Table E-4. How RWMP plan addresses applicable California Water Code Requirements.
California Water Code Requirement How the IRWM Plan Addresses the Requirement Protection and improvement of water supply reliability, including identification of feasible Objectives 13, 15, and 15 seek to maintain or improve agricultural and urban water use efficiency water supply quantity and reliability for all use sectors. strategies. Identification and consideration of the drinking Objective 6, 7, 8, and 9 seek to maintain and improve water quality of communities within the area of the water quality of water resources for all uses, the Plan. including drinking water Protection and improvement of water quality Objectives 6, 7, 8, and 9 seek to protect and improve within the area of the Plan consistent with water quality within the IRWM planning area. relevant basin plan. Objectives 13, 14, and 15 seek to limit over drafting of Identification of any significant threats to groundwater resources by increasing water use groundwater resources from over drafting. efficiency and increasing public awareness of groundwater issues. Protection, restoration, and improvement of Objectives 1 and 2 seek to protect, restore, and stewardship of aquatic, riparian, and watershed regenerate aquatic, riparian, and native habitats in the resources within the region. region. Objectives 6, 7, 8, and 9 seek to protect and improve water quality within the IRWM planning area, including Protection of groundwater resources from groundwater. Objective 14 seeks to increase awareness contamination. of groundwater resource issues, including contamination. Identification and consideration of water-related Objectives 12, 13, and 14 seek to maintain or improve needs of disadvantaged communities in the area water supply quantity and reliability for all use sectors. within the boundaries of the Plan.
E.2.3 Regional Priorities
Within the Tule River Basin IRWMP process, short-term priorities, which can be implemented within a five-year time frame, have been identified. These priorities fall into three focused areas. The first of is addressing drinking water quality issues throughout the IRWMP area. This includes urban suppliers, rural water suppliers and individual rural water systems. The second group priorities fall into the category of water supply reliability for agricultural, municipal, and industrial suppliers. The third category is related to improved water management, including stormwater management and optimization of surface water systems. These priorities include new control systems, replacement of older and deteriorated distribution facilities, recharge basins, pipeline projects, and pumping facilities.
Additional priorities for the five-year term include completing the updates to the Groundwater Management Plan of the DCTRA, along with annual updates, further defining the role of urban water suppliers utilizing groundwater in the Tule River Basin groundwater management activities and completing the update to this IRWMP as contractually will be required by DWR IRWMP approval.
June 2018 E-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Table E-5. How IRWMP objectives address regional priorities.
Tule River Basin Regional Priority How IRMP objectives address regional priorities Objectives 6, 7, 8 and 9 seek to maintain and improve water Address drinking water quality issues. quality for all uses, including drinking water. Objective 5 aims to better coordinate land use with water quality availability. Objectives 13, 14. And 15 seek to balance water supply and demand by decreasing water demand and increasing water use efficiency. Objective 4 seeks to improve conveyance Promote water supply reliability. infrastructure. This would promote basin to basin transfers which would increase the reliability of water supply. Objective 15 specifically seeks to encourage basin to basin transfers. Objective 4 seeks to improve diversion and conveyance Improve and update infrastructure. infrastructure. Objectives 3, 7, 8, and14 seek to improve communication Improve stakeholder coordination and between water managers and land use planners, water users, communication. and tribal communities. Objective 14 seeks to increase knowledge regarding Update DCTRA groundwater management groundwater management. This includes updating the DCTRA plan. Groundwater Management Plan.
E.3 Adopting the IRWM Goals and Objectives
The adoption of the IRWM Objectives was done in a manner to ensure adequate consideration of the diverse regional water management issues had by multiple stakeholder groups. The steps taken to adopt the final IRWMP Objectives were as follows:
1. Identify primary water resources issues through stakeholder advisory group meetings 2. Compare stakeholder-identified water issues to the various requirements listed above. 3. Draft IRWMP Goals to address identified water resource issues 4. Develop Objectives intended to achieve Goals 5. Submit to the Governing Board for Ratification 6. Revise draft IRWM Goals and Objectives after consideration of comments received 7. Submit final draft IRWM Goals and Objectives to RWMG for review and approval 8. The Final Goals and Objectives of the 2018 IRWMP were approved on XXX
June 2018 E-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
E.4 IRWM Goals and Objectives
Goals Objectives
1. Conserve, Enhance and Regenerate Riparian Habitats
Maintain or Improve 2. Conserve and Restore Native Species and Related the Health of Habitats Ecosystems within the Region 3. Protect Water Resources that are critical to Native American Tribal Communities
4. Evaluate and Modify Water Diversion and Conveyance Protection of Life, Infrastructure Structure, Equipment, and 5. Protect and Improve Water Resources through Land Property from Use Practices Flooding
6. Meet Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan Objectives Vision Reduction of Contamination of 7. Management of Recreational Activities to Minimize Impacts on Water Resources Surface and Groundwater Sustain Agricultural, Resources 8. Promote City, Community and Regional Storm Water Urban, and Ecological Management Plans Viability through 9. Evaluate and promote strategies to reduce arsenic, Effective Water nitrate, and perchlorate contamination to levels below Management maximum contaminant level
10. Increase Monitoring and Promote Research Programs to Better Understand the Effects of Climate Change on Expand Regional Ecosystems in the Region Response to Climate Change through 11. Plan for Potential Regional Impacts of Climate Change Mitigation and on Water Quantity and Quality Adaption Strategies 12. Identify and Promote Strategies for Hydroelectric Generation Facilities 13. Optimize Efficient Use, Conservation and Recycling of Work toward Water Resources Achievement of Sustainable Balanced 14. Increase Knowledge Regarding Groundwater Related Surface and Conditions and Establish Groundwater Management Groundwater Practices Supplies 15. Reduce Impacts and Optimize Benefits from Assisting Other Drought-Related Areas with Basin-to Basin Transfers of water
Figure E-1. IRWM Vision, Goals, and Objectives
June 2018 E-8 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
E.4.1 Maintain or Improve the Health of Ecosystems within the Region
1. Conserve, Enhance and Regenerate Riparian Habitats
The Work Plan documents related to both the Habitat Conservation Plan and the National Communities Conservation Plan and the Natural Communities Conservation Plan have yet to be developed, but are a long-term priority of DCTRA given the need to develop projects to address groundwater management, promote carbon sequestration and mitigate the effects of settlement of litigation related to San Joaquin River Restoration.
2. Conserve and Restore Native Species and Related Habitats
The established Recharge Basin objectives have three (3) principal components. These components build upon chosen property characteristics of being in the Tule River corridor, on soils with above-average to outstanding percolation characteristics and capable of diverting water from and returning water to the River or one of its distributaries. The components consist of the site functioning as a groundwater recharge site, a flood impact reduction site and a habitat restoration location. The flood impact reduction function is not limited to urban and/or transportation facility flood/flood damage reduction capabilities, but extends to agricultural lands. Protection of permanent crops and maintenance of the soil mantle are the primary objectives in this case.
3. Protect Water Resources that are critical to Native American Tribal Communities
Water resources have significant cultural, spiritual, and economic significance to Tribal communities. Although the Tule River Reservation is located outside of the IRWMP boundary, a dialogue exists between the DCTRA member districts and the Tule River Tribe to prevent or mitigate the distribution of these important resources. It is an objective of the IRWMP to protect water resources that are critical to Native American Tribal Communities, and to encourage open communication between Tribal communities and other stakeholder groups to find effective water management solutions. The CEQA process supports this objective by requiring a cultural resource analysis prior to project implementation. This process will act as a screening process during project approval.
E.4.2 Protection of Life, Structure, Equipment and Property from Flooding
While devastating flooding, as experienced in 1955, has a potential to be significantly reduced as the result of construction of both Success Dam and the groundwater recharge basins of DCTRA and individual member agencies within the IRWM boundary, the potential for flooding still exists. Issues related to flooding are damage to infrastructure, equipment and property from flood flows from uncontrolled channels such as Frasier Creek and Deer Creek and land and habitat alteration associated with those flood flows. While outside of the IRWM boundary, projects designed and managed to provide flood control for downstream landowners extending into the historic Tulare Lake bed, are of significance. Planning is again underway to address the modification of Success Dam to address improved downstream flood protection.
June 2018 E-9 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
4. Evaluate and Modify Water Diversion and Conveyance Infrastructure
Many of the member agencies of the DCTRA utilize natural channels for water supply conveyance and distribution purposes. Several of the member units, such as the LTRID and the Pixley Irrigation District have undertaken significant distribution system improvements over the last several years. The Porterville Irrigation District has recently completed a system expansion study and is in the process of preparing to undertake expansion related projects. It is an objective of this IRWMP to continue to seek out and implement such evaluation and improvement opportunities.
5. Protect and Improve Water Resources through Land Use Practices
The nexus between land use planning, land use practices and water management, particularly with respect to water quality, is evident within the Tule River Basin. The issues of surface and groundwater contamination, flooding, groundwater overdraft, habitat alteration and erosion are all issues related directly to land use and land use planning. Pursuit of the objective to protect and improve water resources such as flows of the Tule River, sustaining historic levels of importation of Friant Division, CVP supplies, storm water and flood waters management, actions contrary to maintenance of the quality of ground and surface waters and decisions related to the location of housing stock are all of paramount importance. Improved land use practices, maintenance and enhancement of riparian habitats and farm practices and urban runoff practices which seek to minimize sedimentation associated with erosion, are elevated objectives. Sound land use planning which avoids placement of households and locations where the drinking water supply is known to be marginal with respect to quantity or non-compliant with State and Federal drinking water standards is being highlighted as a practice which needs improvement and more diligent implementation. Likewise, sound land use planning involves proper placement of industrial and commercial land uses that recognizes that improper placement could jeopardize the viability of a currently compliant and viable water supply. In pursuit of this objective, land use planning policies have been developed and included in the recently completed Tulare County Disadvantaged Communities Study, an effort covering the counties of Fresno, Kings, Kern and Tulare. The report effort has been supported by significant citizen input including individuals in both elected and appointed positions involving significant interface with land use policy development and enforcement.
E.4.3 Reduction of Contamination of Surface and Groundwater Resources
Reducing contaminants throughout the Tule River Basin will depend on improved methods of materials application and use of pesticides and herbicides, improved treatment and reuse of domestic and industrial wastewater from POTW systems and land use and development practices that incorporate Best Management Practices to deal with issues such as disposal of wastes from septic tank treatment systems and urban and roadside runoff. Member agencies of DCTRA are participants in the Southern San Joaquin Valley Water Quality Coalition and the Tule Basin Water Quality Coalition. The principal purpose of said Coalitions is to identify and either reduce below a harmful level or eliminate sources of contamination which jeopardize beneficial uses of both surface water and groundwater resources.
June 2018 E-10 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
6. Meet Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan Objectives
The numeric standards and the narrative objectives contained in the Basin Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin are currently accorded significant status in project planning within the Tule River Basin. While all surface water directly diverted from the Tule River is diverted for beneficial purposes for either agricultural purposes or groundwater recharge, water quality parameters meeting beneficial use criteria are sought to be protected and enhanced by the water management planning activities conducted within the Tule River Basin. Improving and maintaining surface water quality requires coordination with procedures ongoing pursuant to the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the implementation of Best Management Practices, both as they relate to irrigation related discharges and urban and County and State roadway systems related discharges. In addition, coordination with the County of Tulare and the City of Porterville with respect to solid waste management is necessary in order to satisfy Basin Plan standards and objectives.
7. Management of Recreational Activities to Minimize Impacts on Water Resources
Recent water quality testing has demonstrated frequent, elevated and increasing occurrence of coliform contamination within the surface waters arriving at and coursing through the waterways within the IRWM planning area. While not of historic priority relative to planning activities, increased emphasis by regulatory agencies regarding coliform contamination is elevating the need to begin to address human related impacts, such as those related to recreation, on surface water quality. It is anticipated that future efforts related to this objective will focus on education. To this end, this topic has been added to the current educational outreach topics of the DCTRA.
8. Promote City, Community and Regional Storm Water Management Plans
In cooperation with the Tulare County Flood Control District and the incorporated City of Porterville, the DCTRA has as its objective the promotion of the creation and implementation of adequate storm water management plans. Directing agricultural, roadside and urban generated storm water flows to beneficial uses is an objective of this IRWMP. Planning related to evaluation of the impacts of pollutants carried with the storm waters is of ever increasing concern, particularly with respect to the potential beneficial use of the diversion of these waters for agricultural irrigation and also with regard to the impacts of the pollution on groundwater quality. It is an objective of this IRWMP to seek out reliable, cost-effective and pollution-reducing actions. The member agencies of DCTRA have assisted in the preparation of several stormwater management plans. In particular, the LTRID has contracted to receive waters from Strathmore and Frazier Creeks and properly manage the disposal of said waters utilizing both existing system elements and new additions.
9. Evaluate and promote strategies to reduce arsenic, nitrate, and perchlorate contamination to levels below maximum contaminant level
Arsenic, nitrate, and perchlorate contamination can have a wide variety of negative impacts on ecosystems and human health. There are areas within the IRWMP region that have unsafe drinking water as a result of these chemicals. It is the objective of the IRWMP to reduce the presence of these harmful contaminants in water resources to safe levels. Arsenic, nitrate, and perchlorate contamination is discussed further in Section C- Region Description.
June 2018 E-11 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Arsenic contamination is a serious threat to public health. The Pixley Public Utility District reported arsenic levels that exceed the maximum contaminant levels, however arsenic pollution in this area is due to natural arsenic deposits, which become soluble because of the area’s soil chemistry. Arsenic levels in the district have declined as well treatment programs were established. Arsenic levels will continue to be reduced through monitoring and well treatment programs.
Nitrate can pose risk to ecological and human health. Nitrate contamination in the district is most likely due to agricultural runoff. Nitrate levels have remained under the maximum contaminant threshold, however nitrate levels will continue to be limited through public education and mandatory applied nitrate reporting programs.
Perchlorate was detected at levels exceeding the maximum contaminate threshold within the IRWMP region prior to 2012, however perchlorate levels have remained under the maximum contaminant threshold from 2012 to 2017. Perchlorate contamination is caused by perchlorate salts used industrial and military applications and can lead to a variety of human health problems. Perchlorate levels will continue to be reduced through existing public education programs and state water quality legislation.
E.4.4 Expand Regional Response to Climate Change through Mitigation and Adaption Strategies
Climate change is predicted to have numerous impacts on water quality and availability both regionally and state-wide. Regional impacts include irregular water supply, reduced groundwater recharge, and increased runoff, erosion and flooding. State impacts include these, as well as sea level rise and saltwater intrusion. The magnitude of impact on the region as a result of climate change impacts is not known at this time. Although this IRWM plan attempts to address the most apparent climate change impacts, it is likely that mitigation and adaption strategies will need to be altered as new information becomes available. It is the objective of the IRWMP to facilitate adaptive management so that the region is prepared to handle both the foreseeable and unforeseeable impacts of climate change. (Climate Change impacts, along with potential mitigation and adaption strategies, are discussed in greater detail in Section O – Climate Change.)
10. Increase Monitoring and Promote Research Programs to Better Understand the Effects of Climate Change on Ecosystems in the Region Although there has been significant research regarding the impacts of climate change globally and in specific areas, the impacts of climate change on ecosystems within the IRWM planning area is still unknown. Water managers play a critical role in limiting the severity of these impacts by developing projects and programs to increase ecosystem resiliency in response to climate change. It is the continuing objective of the DCTRA to increase knowledge regarding the impacts of climate change to ecosystems in the region in order to develop effective projects and programs to increase ecosystem resiliency.
June 2018 E-12 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
11. Plan for Potential Regional Impacts of Climate Change on Water Quantity and Quality Climate is expected to have increasingly severe impacts on the quality and availability of water resources. Continuous evaluation and response to these impacts is essential to maintain the region’s urban and agricultural viability. It is the objective of the DCTRA to continuously evaluate changes in water quality and availability as a result of climate change and to develop projects and programs to respond to these impacts.
12. Identify and Promote Strategies for Hydroelectric Generation Facilities
The DCTRA aims to encourage renewable energy by promoting hydroelectric generation facilities. Hydroelectric generation facilities provide clean renewable energy which is able to offset GHG emissions that would have been produced through other means of power generation. Implementation of Hydroelectric Generation Facilities would reduce regional GHG emissions associated with energy production and is consistent with AB 32 Scoping Plan strategies. The Lower Tule River Irrigation District a member agency of DCTRA, has developed a 1.4 KW hydroelectric generating plant at Success Reservoir. Developed in 1989, the plant is identified as SPP1. The hydroelectric facility runs on the irrigation release schedules, generating electrical power based on the flow and head characteristics occurring on any given day. LTRID, as both an IRWM objective and as a partner in DCTRA, will continue to explore opportunities to enhance the production of hydroelectric power while protecting the beneficial use of the water employed in generating such power. In addition, to the extent possible, DCTRA members look to optimize power production through development of an enlarged Success Reservoir. It will be a continuing objective of DCTRA, through the implementation of the objectives contained in this IRWMP, to continue to seek those opportunities.
E.4.5 Work toward Achievement of Sustainable Balanced Surface and Groundwater Supplies
The issues of watershed conditions, water storage, water diversion, water delivery infrastructure and groundwater maintenance need to be addressed. As water demands are continuously evaluated, the need to augment naturally occurring groundwater recharge is evident and therefore additional water recharge capacity will be needed to meet future water demands. Existing diversion methodologies and delivery infrastructure will need to be as efficient as possible and balanced with conservation and recycling opportunities. Groundwater, the principal source of water supply for the entire Tule River Basin, is increasingly being pumped to meet agricultural, municipal and industrial demands. Included in this extraction process is that supply necessary to meet rural needs, both community and individual. Therefore, groundwater resources must be managed to ensure sustainability which is the expression of balance between extraction and recharge. As a significant step in the pursuit of this objective, the DCTRA has developed and implemented a groundwater management plan which is SB1938 compliant.
13. Optimize Efficient Use, Conservation and Recycling of Water Resources
Supporting efficient water use both increases water availability and reduces GHG emissions by reducing energy consumption associated with groundwater extraction. Based on its founding purposes, DCTRA has sought to implement policies, procedures, and projects that optimize efficient use of available water resources. Conservation measures include education and regular groundwater recharge procedures. With respect to recycling, the DCTRA will continue to pursue projects and programs which encourage recycling of both treated effluent and urban storm water
June 2018 E-13 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
related flow sources. Techniques such as stormwater capture, water recycling, and reuse both increase regional water supply and are strategies to reduce GHG emissions consistent with the AB 32 Scoping Plan. For example, agencies within the IRWM boundary fully recycle treated wastewater effluent, thus reducing extraction of groundwater in storage to meet crop demand requirements.
14. Increase Knowledge Regarding Groundwater Related Conditions and Establish Groundwater Management Practices
The DCTRA has an adopted Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP). Both the KDWCD and the Tule River Basin have developed numeric groundwater models designed to offer a tool for management of water resources within each basin, to evaluate boundary conditions between the two (2) watersheds and to allow for specific impact analysis of proposed developments within the IRWMP boundary. It is an objective of DCTRA to work with its IRWM partners to further enhance understanding of groundwater and to further develop the tools necessary to improve that knowledge base. Ongoing activities with the City of Porterville and discussions with serving utilities for several unincorporated communities are examples of opportunities to further enhance the groundwater modeling within the area, often specific to the land use and water planning efforts of IRWM partners. It is an objective of DCTRA to maintain the Tule River Basin numeric groundwater model, its related database and to share same with water management partners within the Tule River Basin for the benefit of the groundwater resource.
15. Reduce Impacts and Optimize Benefits from Assisting Other Drought-Related Areas with Basin-to Basin Transfers of water
DCTRA member agencies which are signatory to the Tule River Association organization Agreement implement an unwritten policy related to impact reduction resulting from out-of- basin water transfers. While it is the policy of the Board of Directors of TRA to assist other areas in need during times of extended drought, the member units examine transfers from the perspective of mitigation of impacts related to water transfers to out-of-basin entities. Adherence to this procedure and ensuring that adequate facilities exist to accept return transfers in above- normal and wet conditions is and remains an objective of this IRWMP. In the prior year of extreme drought, dry-year transfers of water were facilitated by DCTRA member agencies. This program benefited several Friant Division, CVP contract entities with a dry-year supplemental supply and will allow for the return of a multiple of the exchanged supply in future years, providing a supplemental benefit to the groundwater reservoir.
June 2018 E-14 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
E.4.6 Goals and Objectives Metrics
Table E-6. Quantitative and qualitative metrics to assess IRWMP objectives.
Objectives Qualitative Measurement Quantitative Measurements Increasing number of acres preserved for ecosystem restoration and/or 1. Conserve, Enhance and preservation. Regenerate Riparian Increasing number of acres of Habitats healthy or improved natural recharge areas associated with riparian corridors. Increasing number of acres 2. Conserve and Restore preserved or restored for native Native Species and Related species and their related Habitats habitats Decreasing number of 3. Protect Water Resources comments or complaints from that are critical to Native tribal communities regarding
American Tribal loss, or potential loss, of quality Communities or quantity of their water supplies. Increasing number of studies to evaluate functionality and sustainability of existing water 4. Evaluate and Modify Water Increasing improvement in diversion and conveyance Diversion and Conveyance existing water diversion and infrastructure. Infrastructure conveyance infrastructure Increasing number of miles of water diversion and conveyance infrastructure
Increasing level of management 5. Protect and Improve Water over land use practices to Resources through Land prevent impacts to water Use Practices resources.
Increasing number of projects consistent with adopted 6. Meet Applicable Regional Increase in the overall level of Groundwater Management Plan Water Quality Control management and governance Basin Management Objectives Board Basin Plan through adopted Basin (BMOs) for the improvement of Objectives Management Plans. the health of a groundwater basin.
June 2018 E-15 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
Objectives Qualitative Measurement Quantitative Measurements 7. Management of Increasing number of programs Recreational Activities to with the intent to minimize
Minimize Impacts on Water recreation related water Resources resource impacts Decrease the number of 8. Promote City, Community communities without a Storm and Regional Storm Water Water Management Plan Management Plans (Objective = 0) 9. Evaluate and promote strategies to reduce arsenic, nitrate, and Decreasing arsenic, nitrate, and
perchlorate contamination perchlorate levels. to levels below maximum contaminant level 10. Increase Monitoring and Increasing number of Promote Research projects/programs to Programs to Better study/monitor the effects of Understand the Effects of climate change on ecosystems Climate Change on in the region Ecosystems in the Region Increasing number of 11. Plan for Potential Regional projects/programs intended to Impacts of Climate Change increase regional resiliency with
on Water Quantity and regard to climate change Quality impacts on water quantity and water quality 12. Identify and Promote Increase the number of Strategies for Hydroelectric Hydroelectric generation Generation Facilities facilities within the Region Increase number of 13. Optimize Efficient Use, projects/programs related to Conservation and Recycling water conservation and of Water Resources recycling 14. Increase Knowledge Existence of public education Regarding Groundwater programs for groundwater Related Conditions and management efforts to Establish Groundwater promote them Management Practices 15. Reduce Impacts and Optimize Benefits from Existence of adequate facilities Assisting Other Drought- to give and accept basin-to- Related Areas with Basin-to basin transfers of water. Basin Transfers of water
June 2018 E-16 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section E – Goals and Objectives
E.5 Prioritization of IRWM Goals and Objectives
The objectives have not been established in any priority sequence, as flexibility has been demonstrated to exist between these items and issues based on either acknowledged current need for specific implementation of an element or a unique opportunity existing related to a particular objective such as a partnership opportunity or funding opportunity.
June 2018 E-17
Section F Resource Management Strategies
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.1 Introduction
A variety of Resource Management Strategies (RMS) are provided by the California Water Plan to help local agencies and governments manage their water resources. RMS should be selected based on regional needs, project objectives, and cohesivity with existing water systems. RMS are grouped into 8 management objectives.
1. Reduce Water Demand 2. Improve Flood Management 3. Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers 4. Increase Water Supply 5. Improve Water Quality 6. Practice Resource Stewardship 7. Other
In Compliance with the 2016 IRWMP Guidelines, this section will discuss a range of RMS considered to meet the IRWM objectives and identify the process in which RMS were incorporated into the IRWM Plan. Additionally, the effects of climate change will be assessed in consideration of RMS.
F.2 Resource Management Strategies
The 2013 California Water Plan Update describes 32 different RMS. It is not anticipated that all strategies are applicable to every region of the State, but encouragement is given to foster and implement as many strategies as practical to diversify water management efforts. This section evaluates all 32 strategies contained in the 2013 California Water Plan Update and considers the following:
1. Description of the RMS 2. Discussion of the current applicability to the Tule River Basin 3. Evaluation of the current use of the strategies to the Tule River Basin 4. Discussion of constraints to implementation or constraints to enhancement 5. Discussion of potential impacts of climate change on the strategy 6. Ability of the strategy to help adapt to climate change impacts.
June 2018 F-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.2.1 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency
The agricultural water use efficiency strategy aims to use scientific processes to reduce agricultural water demand while maintaining or increasing total agricultural output. Agricultural water use efficiency is expressed in terms of crop yield for a given unit amount of water. As mentioned in previous sections, agriculture accounts for a large majority of total water use within the IRWMP region. As such, this resource management strategy is highly applicable to water management in the region. The 2009 California Water Plan Update lists 16 Efficient Water Management Practices (EWMPs). These are as follows:
Critical EWMPs
1. Measure the volume of water delivered to customers with sufficient accuracy to comply with subdivision (a) of California Water Code Section 531.10 and to implement EWMP #2. 2. Adopt a pricing structure for water customers based at least in part on quantity delivered.
Other EWMPs
3. Facilitate alternative land use for lands with exceptionally high-water duties or whose irrigation contributes to significant problems including drainage. 4. Facilitate use of available recycled water that otherwise would not be used beneficially, meet all health and safety criteria, and do not harm crops or soils. 5. Facilitate the financing of capital improvements for on-farm irrigation systems. 6. Implement an incentive pricing structure that promotes one or more of the following goals: • More efficient water use at the farm level. • Conjunctive use of groundwater. • Appropriate increase of groundwater recharge. • Reduction in problem drainage. • Improved management of environmental resources. • Effective management of all water sources throughout the year by adjusting seasonal pricing structures based on current conditions. 7. Expand line or pipe distribution systems, and construct regulatory reservoirs to increase distribution system flexibility and capacity, decrease maintenance, and reduce seepage. 8. Increase flexibility in water ordering by, and delivery to, water customers within operational limits. 9. Construct and operate supplier spill and tailwater recovery systems. 10. Increase planned conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater within the supplier service area. 11. Automate canal control structures. 12. Facilitate or promote customer pump testing and evaluation. 13. Designate a water conservation coordinator who will develop and implement the water management plan and prepare progress reports. 14. Provide for the availability of water management services to water users. These services may include, but are not limited to, all of the following: • On-farm irrigation and drainage system evaluations. • Normal year and real-time irrigation scheduling and crop evapotranspiration information. o Surface water, groundwater, and drainage water quantity and quality data.
June 2018 F-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
• Agricultural water management educational programs and materials for farmers, staff, and the public. 15. Evaluate the policies of agencies that provide the supplier with water to identify the potential for institutional changes to allow more flexible water deliveries and storage. 16. Evaluate and improve the efficiencies of the supplier’s pumps.
Most of these EWMPs are employed throughout the Tule River Basin. For example, where conveyance system piping occurs, it is often within an area converted to urban use where impact fees have been paid allowing for construction of an offsetting recharge area. In some areas where piping has been employed, the piping is actually laid in the prior open channel section. Only dry-year supplies are conveyed through the pipeline system, whereas normal and above-normal year supplies are still conveyed in the open channel sections, thus allowing for groundwater recharge to occur. For some of the EWMPs, implementation is on a Basin-wide basis. These include water management services to water users wherein on-farm advice is made available to growers in the entire region.
Likewise, several entities within the Tule River Basin are signatory to the Memorandum of Understanding of the Agricultural Water Management Council. Said organization is a non-profit that promotes improvements in agricultural water efficiency and provides technical assistance in the preparation of plans which detail implementing policies, outlines the methods by which assistance is provided and documents efforts to implement the goals associated with EWMPs.
For those areas which have surface water supply service through a contractor from the Friant Division, CVP, Water Management Plans meeting the requirements of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the Agricultural Water Management Council have been prepared. Annual reports and 5-year updates to these plans are required by the repayment contracts associated with the allocation of CVP Project Water.
The majority of the water supply entities within the Tule River Basin are public in nature, thus greatly reducing obstacles to EWMP implementation. However, funding of efficiency related projects is often an obstacle. Local conditions such as topography, micro-climates and flood control channel maintenance issues also impede implementation of EWMPs.
Elevated temperatures and irregular precipitation patterns resulting from climate change hasten the need for strategies targeted towards agricultural water use efficiency. Temperature is highly correlated with evapotranspiration, and increasing temperatures will lead to increased agricultural water demand. Increasing temperatures will also lead to a reduction in snowpack, California’s largest “reservoir.” Agricultural water use efficiency strategies will improve the region’s ability to adapt to these changes.
Although agricultural water use efficiency projects are critical to the region’s ability to adapt to climate change, implementation of these projects may result in a temporary increase in GHG emissions. This would be offset in time, as the reduction in water demand would reduce energy use related to water infrastructure systems.
June 2018 F-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.2.2 Urban Water Use Efficiency
Principal to urban water use efficiency is the issue of behavioral improvements that lead to the decrease of indoor and outdoor residential, commercial, industrial and institutional water use. To a lesser degree, unlike agricultural water use efficiency, technological improvements are readily employed as only cash expenditures are required to be made, in lieu of modification of behavioral patterns. Best management practices (BMPs) or demand management measures (DMMs) are the measures typically set forth by regulatory and advisory authorities with the more common practices and measures being as follows:
1. Water use survey programs; 2. Residential plumbing retrofits; 3. Water system audits; 4. Water metering; 5. Large landscape conservation programs; 6. Clothes washing machine rebate programs; 7. Public information programs; 8. School educational programs; 9. Conservation programs for non-residential users; 10. Wholesale agency assistance programs; 11. Inverse tiered conservation pricing procedures; 12. Availability of Conservation Coordinator; 13. Water waste prohibition ordinances; and 14. Reduced-flow water closet replacement.
Most of these BMPs and DMMs are in place within the Tule River Basin. The level of implementation and the practice varies, however, based principally on the implementing agency. The City of Porterville has extensive urban water conservation goals, policies and programs, well funded and properly administered. New conservation measures are constantly being examined and some, as demonstrated in current drought conditions, implemented with relative ease.
State legislation, in the form of SBx7-7, also known as the Water Conservation Act of 2009, established a goal of reducing per-capita water use of 20 percent by 2020. That goal has been required to be met earlier by an implementing executive order related to the current drought situation, implemented principally by actions to require mandatory reduction in outside watering. Where landscape conversions are taking place in order to reduce consumption, most have the capability of being accomplished on a permanent basis which could result in a long-term reduction in water demand. Obstacles to implementation of urban efficiency measures include a lack public acceptance, inadequate public funding, and improperly structured water meter rates.
The relationship between climate change and urban water use efficiency is similar to that of climate change and agricultural water use efficiency. Increased temperatures will increase evapotranspiration, which will increase the amount of water demand for landscaping. Irregular precipitation will make water resources less dependable. Improving urban water use efficiency will increase the region’s ability to adapt to these changes.
As with agricultural water use efficiency projects, urban water use efficiency projects would likely result in a temporary increase in GHG emissions as a result of project construction. However, this would
June 2018 F-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
eventually be offset as the reduction in water demand would lead to reduced energy use related to water infrastructure systems.
F.2.3 Crop Idling for Water Transfers
Crop idling is practiced within some private stock ditch companies within the IRWM boundaries. In some cases, public agencies allow growers to fallow land for a season and transfer water to another grower within the same entity boundaries. Crop idling is typically an extreme measure within the Tule River Basin in response principally to drought conditions. As such, it does not exist on a large scale basis. As previously referenced under the transfers discussion of this chapter, procedures and agreements are already in place to deal with the transfer of entitlement generated from crop idling (single-year land retirement) related activities. It is acknowledge that there are a number of social and economic impacts associated with crop idling which have not been significant, to date, on the limited basis for which these retirement procedures have occurred. Expanding such activities to a larger basis will require examination of the social and economic impacts to determine if they must be addressed in the future.
F.2.4 Irrigated Land Retirement
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, in conjunction with the Bureau of Land Management has retired a significant number of acres in the southwest portion of Tulare County, outside the boundaries of the IRWM. No such land retirement steps have been taken within the IRWM boundaries, nor are there any currently under discussion. As drainage impaired lands do not exist within the IRWM Planning Area, funding for such land retirement steps does not currently exist.
As the objective of irrigated land retirement is the removal of farm land from irrigated agricultural production to provide water supplies elsewhere, or to take unproductive land out of production, examination has to be made of the value of the lands within the IRWM boundaries for the productive differential between lands within the boundaries as compared to other lands where the water supply resulting from land retirement would be made available. As the lands within the IRWM boundaries are all high-value, high-soil class and microclimate lands, it is unlikely that lands within the Tule River Basin would be a replacement target for lands external to the subject boundaries. As some of the most significant agricultural land in the world exists within the IRWM boundaries and as the gross farm gate receipts are reflective of one of the top counties in the nation, it is not likely that the area will be the subject target for this program in the short-term or long-term. The land parcels which have been identified to be marginal with respect to agricultural production have been the primary targets for acquisition for groundwater recharge areas. As previously noted, the opportunities for purchase of these types of land to enhance the groundwater recharge basin inventory have significantly diminished over time. As the opportunity nonetheless exists for retirement potential, this strategy has not been determined to be not applicable. It will remain on the “watch” list for future policy examination efforts related to the IRWM Plan.
June 2018 F-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.2.5 Conveyance – Delta
Conveyance through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta includes the management, movement and diversion of water from that area. Approximately 5,309 acre-feet of Delta-base supply is applicable to the County of Tulare, with 100 acre-feet being contracted for by the Saucelito Irrigation District and 45 acre- feet by Styro-Tek. Four hundred acre-feet is also contracted for delivery by the Strathmore Public Utility District. This contract supply is not currently being employed for other than groundwater recharge purposes and thus a significant reliance on Delta related diversions only exists within the Tule River Basin by Friant Division, CVP contractors. The majority of the supply coming into the Tule River Basin which is of a Friant Division, CVP nature, is split between Class 1 and Class 2 supply, with the Class 2 supply principally from Purchased Water Contract supplies from the natural flows of the San Joaquin River, not connected with diversions from the Delta.
F.2.6 Conveyance – Regional/Local
Conveyance is that action to move water from its source to areas of need. Conveyance within the Tule River Basin consists principally of utilization of natural channels and earthen constructed facilities, many of which incorporate significant elements of historic natural channels. At the district and ditch company level, constructed facilities, such as diversion facilities and canals, exist with, as previously noted, limited employment of pipelines and pumping facilities. These conveyance facilities range in size from larger systems employing relatively high capacity earthen channels to small, local, end-user distribution systems that deliver water to specific landowners/growers. Urban related deliveries are only those associated with groundwater recharge with two surface water treatment facilities existing within the Planning Area serving Strathmore and Terra Bella. For the most part, larger conveyance systems utilized for delivery of agricultural supplies are also facilities utilized for flood control purposes and management and maintenance activities are principally oriented toward the flood control aspect. As a result, only during times of high Tule River releases from Success Reservoir are these facilities inadequate to convey water to areas for distribution for use and/or recharge and few problems exist distributing available volumes to meet peak summer demands.
The same systems are utilized to convey storm waters during the winter periods and coordination efforts must be employed to ensure proper conveyance and disposal of storm water related flows, along with Tule River entitlement flows mandated to be released from Success Reservoir for flood control purposes. Based on the fact that improved automation and controls can increase operational flexibility, some steps have been made to begin to automate controls on the Tule River system and further, telemetry systems to monitor diversions to ensure that any losses associated with spills are reduced to as close to a zero level as possible.
Climate change may affect this paradigm wherein demand for higher conveyance capacity may increase if the timing and volume of flows changes due to atmospheric warming trends. In addition, increased capacity may be needed to deliver water during periods of the year which are not the prime growing season, as well as to deliver higher volumes of water than are currently experienced for short periods of time.
June 2018 F-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.2.7 System Reoperation
System reoperation is defined as actions taken with respect to existing operational procedures related to reservoirs and conveyance facilities to alter water related benefits. System reoperation is typically examined in the context of improving the delivery of water to improve the efficiency related to existing uses or to impose improvement in one use over another. For instance, operation of reservoir releases for power production would be enhanced if releases were during a defined period of peak power use, as compared to running a generator on a run-of-the-river basis, where releases are dictated by agricultural water demands.
Water rights on the Tule River are managed by the Tule River Association (Association). Agreements exist between all of the pre-1914 water users associated with the Tule River and the major riparian users of River water. These agreements define the operational policies for the member units and have proven to be instrumental in reducing conflicts between water users, in establishing guidelines for management of available supplies and ensuring compliance with State law relative to water rights priorities.
Significant system reoperation procedures are felt to be limited with respect to existing systems. Storage limitations associated with Success Reservoir exist, particularly from November 15 to May 1 of the following year as the reservoir is operated exclusively for flood control purposes. The balance of the year, system operations are tuned to the desires of the water rights holders and the demands of stockholders to meet the requirements of their existing demands. Individual entities currently are experimenting with operational changes, some due to power generation enhancement, as compared to water use efficiency modifications.
Changed conditions in the future could result in a basis for reoperations and, thus, the issue needs to be periodically evaluated. These changes could include impacts related to proposed changes in groundwater regulations, as well as climate change induced conditions.
F.2.8 Water Transfers
Established California legal statutes define water transfers as temporary or long-term changes in the point of diversion, place of use or purpose of use resulting from the transfer or exchange of water or related water rights. Water transfers are a recognized beneficial water management tool within the Tule River Basin, with specific guidelines established for both in-Basin and external Basin transfers and exchanges having been developed over the years. Such guidelines development has been based on the demonstrated capability of transfers and exchanges to accomplish the securing of new supplies, to increase supply reliability, to assist in maintenance of the groundwater basin and addressing droughts and associated overdraft conditions. Water transfers are a particularly important tool in response to climate change, which is anticipated to cause extreme precipitation events followed by long drought periods. In some cases water transfers have been used to generate revenue during certain market conditions to be leveraged to future water purchases during the existence of more ample water supply conditions. For instance, a reduced period run during dry year conditions can result in income being generated sufficient to allow for purchase of external Basin supplies sufficient to run for weeks in length. Foregoing a few days of water run and associated loss patterns, in exchange for recovery of all water lost and a multiple supply imported with funds generated from the initial transfer are recognized as significant water management tools within the Tule River Basin.
June 2018 F-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
These transfers and exchanges are not without constraint. Many ditch companies with pre-1914 water rights have long established boundary restrictions for delivery of their water rights. Many adhere to an unwritten Basin water transfer policy which restricts the conditions under which transfers can take place and requires findings by the Water master and the Association Board of Directors prior to a transfer being approved. To a limited extent, additional constraints are imposed based on costs established for water being made available for transfer, Groundwater Management Plan Memorandum of Understanding constraints and restrictions and facility related issues. For out-of-Basin transfers, additional restrictions are imposed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation as Federal facilities are required to be utilized in out-of- Basin transfers. Mechanisms are currently in place to allow these transfers and exchanges to take place, to invite proposals related to water banking and to hopefully comply with requirements associated with recent groundwater legislation. In exchange, obtaining tangible, measurable water supply benefits is fundamental to any program of this nature.
F.2.9 Flood Risk Management
The City of Porterville and the County of Tulare have been invited to become signator to the Memorandum of Understanding providing the basis for the IRWM Plan and and do play a role in the management structure. These agencies, in combination with the State and County Offices of Emergency Services, are those principally responsible for flood risk management. In this case, management is defined as assisting individuals and government infrastructure agencies and departments with assistance in and response to preparing for, responding to and recovering from a flood event. Solutions which are offered are both structural in nature and include policy issues such as land use zoning and flood plain zoning. At the current time, considerable dialogue is at the forefront involving the activities of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) with respect to their determination of what constitutes an adequate flood control levee. Mitigating flood management is a crucial component of climate change adaption, as flood risk is expected to increase as storm events and wildfire increase in severity causing reduced infiltration and increased runoff. An increase in either the severity or intensity of flooding may require modifications to monitoring systems and improvements in flood plain protection structures. Land use planning policies may also need to be re-examined under this paradigm.
F.2.10 Agricultural Lands Stewardship
In cooperation with landowners/growers, the DCTRA, along with the Agricultural Commissioner of the County of Tulare and the University of California Extension are heavily engaged in agricultural lands stewardship. In this context, agricultural land stewardship involves the conservation of natural resources and protection of environmental features associated with agricultural lands. The joint practice of conducting land operations for food production while recognizing considerations such as soil preservation, air quality, energy conservation and threatened and endangered species habitat development and maintenance, are all elements of agricultural land stewardship. The accepted definition also extends to protection of open space characteristics, as well as the buffer zone between agricultural operations and rural communities. As Tule River Basin lands are fully developed, the impacts associated with conversion of agricultural land to urbanized land further impacts agricultural lands to accommodate issues such as storm water management, flood control, water conservation, carbon sequestration and habitat preservation. Within the Basin, preservation of the remaining examples of riparian oak forest and riparian oak savannah has been undertaken, as well as vernal pool preservation.
June 2018 F-8 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
Agricultural lands stewardship contributes to the region’s climate change mitigation efforts by promoting energy conservation, which reduces GHG emissions, and encouraging native vegetation, which increases carbon sequestration. Additionally, this management strategy increases the region’s adaptability to climate change through the enhancement of biodiversity, which increases ecosystem resilience to climatic changes.
Constraints obviously exist to further implementation of these stewardship activities. Principal among these is funding, not just for initial purchase and maintenance, but also for security related functions. Illegal drug activities and steps necessary to avoid intentionally set fires compete with the desire to utilize the settings for public access and related educational purposes.
F.2.11 Economic Incentives (Loans, Grants and Water Pricing)
Economic incentives related to water management efforts run the gamut from policy development to implementation. Water marketing, water banking and water pricing policies are all driven by economic considerations and economic incentives play a significant role in the degree to which these activities take place. Direct financial assistance or water pricing, in conformance with the statutory requirements associated with Proposition 218, are fundamental to the offering of incentives. These criteria are typically deeply engrained in economic incentives associated with loans, grants and rebates. Other economic incentives can involve the granting of free services, timing of the use of power, availability of treated wastewater for reuse and costs associated with easements associated with access to sources of water supply. On the periphery, economic incentives can also produce benefits of an environmental or social type and influence the construction of new facilities through delay and/or avoidance alternative procedures.
Particular to the IRWM Area, specific incentive examples include tiered water pricing, rebate programs for installing conservation devices and exchanges of treated wastewater for high quality surface water for recharge and/or direct reuse. Additional incentives are available to landowners/growers relative to on farm irrigation efficiency in the form of system conversion financial assistance.
Economic incentives are the most powerful way to encourage efficient water use. As such, they are a useful tool to address climate change mitigation and adaption. Incentivizing water consumers to limit water use when water supplies are unreliable increases the region’s adaptability to climate change. The reduction in water demand will also reduce energy use related to water infrastructure systems, which will ultimately reduce GHG emissions.
F.2.12 Ecosystem Restoration
Ecosystem restoration provides numerous water management related benefits. Restored ecosystems can increase the quality and quantity of water supplies, which benefits urban and agricultural water users as well as a variety of ecosystem dependent species. Improved water quality associated with ecosystem restoration can reduce the energy demand and monetary costs associated with water treatment. The reduction of energy demand ultimately reduces the region’s GHG emissions. GHG emissions are further offset as native vegetation is restored, increasing the rate of carbon sequestration.
June 2018 F-9 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
In addition to climate change mitigation, ecosystem restoration contributes to climate change adaption by increasing infiltration, which reduces the risk of flood and water quality impacts resulting from high runoff. Additionally, native ecosystems are adapted to natural fire and will be more resilient in response to the increased wildfire risk associated with climate change.
A principal water management element which exists within the adjacent Kaweah River Basin IRWM Planning Area is the implementation of the outcomes related to the Kaweah River Corridor Study. The focus of this study was on the development of lands within the Basin on which could be developed projects which were multi-purpose in nature. The targeted purposes included groundwater recharge, storm water control and habitat preservation/restoration. To date, a number of examples now exist within the Kaweah Basin of multipurpose projects involving water management where habitat preservation, habitat development or a combination of both, are principal elements of project development. Under the leadership of the City of Visalia and the KDWCD, groundwater recharge and storm water basin design has left the era of the sterile engineered levee configuration for a design which accommodates re-vegetation of both trees and native grasses and incorporates significantly different maintenance activities than those associated with the sterile levee type of approach.
Parallel to these efforts, the DCTRA has constructed basins with the groundwater recharge and environmental benefits. DCTRA has also been engaged in discussions related to restoration projects associated with Deer Creek sand mine sites which are now in the reclamation phase, or are anticipated to enter that phase in the near-term.
There are a number of recognized constraints to development of ecosystem restoration projects, which include sufficient funds to acquire property, high costs associated with property acquisitions, impacts on adjacent parcels which are farmed where introduction of endangered species may be a potential, rodent control and weed control activities. The degree to which protection and restoration has been implemented within the Basin demonstrates that the majority of these obstacles can be successfully overcome.
F.2.13 Forest Management
There are no forests located within the IRWM Planning Area. A significant portion of the Tule River Watershed is, however, forested up to the high-altitude tree line. The management of these forest lands is split between the U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service and a recognized Tule River Indian Reservation. As a result, water management entities located within the Tule River Basin have no governance authority over activities within these forests. Acknowledging, however, the fact that activities such as water management, timber management, native and invasive vegetation management, outdoor recreation and stock grazing occur within the forested areas, has led to an active input position to the agencies charged with overseeing watershed quality related issues. The input takes the shape of communication with the governing agencies with respect to their proposed policies and procedures and is anticipated to expand to include a cooperative effort in this regard with the recently formed Southern Sierra IRWM.
June 2018 F-10 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.2.14 Recharge Area Protection
Protection of land uses for specific purposes are enveloped in law for a number of topics. Most significant of these are policies related to mineral resources where lands containing identified mineral resources which have been determined to exist by the State are required to be protected from encroachment by land uses which may impede their development. To date, no such procedures exist within the IRWM Planning Area for candidate water management sites, even though groundwater recharge and banking programs may be of benefit to the urban development of lands currently in agricultural production. No rules currently exist which would ensure that area suitable for development for recharge purposes are protected from an agricultural to urban environment conversion. In addition, pollutant loads from urbanization are not currently subjected to the same water quality criteria as exists for agricultural areas. The potential thus exists for groundwater recharge areas to be subject to contamination. The topic is one which was discussed during development of the recent General Plan update by the County of Tulare, however, policies were not introduced into said update reflecting requested area protection measures. Based on the current lack of policy development and implementation, entities developing recharge areas are left to their own devices with respect to protection of prime recharge areas.
This necessitates a significantly higher financial investment in land than would just basin site acquisition and development. Thus, the buying power of the funds associated with groundwater recharge are diminished as land must be purchased for protection of the recharge area from contamination, in addition to purchasing the recharge area itself. One of the current policy suggestions to improve this situation has been to begin development of mapping on which is depicted the prime recharge areas within the IRWM Planning Area.
F.2.15 Sediment Management
Improper sediment management can lead to poor water quality and habitat degradation. Sediment management, as described by the California Water Plan 2016 update, involves the assessment of the cumulative impacts of all past, present, and proposed human activities in predicting the impacts of sediment on surface waters. Sediment management in water bodies typically focuses on addressing three issues:
1. The type and source of sediment. 2. The systems transporting sediment. 3. The location where sediment deposits
Preventing erosion and the transport of sediment on a regional level is the preferred sediment management strategy in the IRWMP area. In the Tule River Basin, proper farming and urban development practices are required to encourage soil conservation and limit sediment pollutants. Erosion control through the use of low impact development techniques and vegetative or man-made ground cover to stabilize top soil is an effective way to prevent excess sedimentation. Source management techniques are enforced by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and documented in the 2015 Tule Basin Water Quality Coalition Sediment Discharge and Erosion Assessment Report. Parcels within the region with an annual soil loss risk value over 15 tons/acre/year are also required to submit a Sediment Discharge and Erosion Control Plan. Because the IRWM planning area is generally flat, the NRCS classifies the Erosion Hazard for a majority of the IRWMP region as slight.
June 2018 F-11 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
When erosion occurs, sediment is transported downstream where it is eventually deposited into water bodies. The transport of sediment is managed by leveraging natural functions that create optimal sediment transport. This can include diverting sediments into settling ponds or wetlands where they can provide beneficial use. Measures to reduce adverse sediment transport are required in Sediment Discharge and Erosion Control Plans.
Once deposited, sediment can have both positive and negative impacts on waterbodies and surrounding ecosystems. The goal of sediment deposition management is to limit the negative impacts of sedimentation in waterbodies while preserving positive impacts. In the Tule River Basin, high sediment loads can reduce the storage capacity behind Success Dam. In addition, uncontrolled stream systems feeding into the IRWMP area are sensitive to high volume sediment loads. The recharge capability of the Tule River, its distributaries, and the uncontrolled stream system beds are the principal locations where effective groundwater recharge occurs. Accumulation of sediments in these channels is averse to their effective percolation capability.
Sediment extraction or dredging can be an effective way remove excess sediment once deposited, however this can directly affect water quality, habitat quality, and contaminant distribution by increasing turbidity and suspended solids. This method is best used in limited areas where an excessive amount of sediment is deposited.
Climate Change would have adverse effects on sedimentation. Increased risk of wildfire and drought could limit vegetative cover and increase erosion. A severe storm event following the loss of vegetative cover would further exacerbate erosion and result in high sediment loads, which could then impact water quality, water storage capacity, and groundwater recharge. As a result, stricter regional sediment management strategies may need to be enforced. Additionally, sediment extraction or dredging may be required where excess sediment is deposited to preserve water resources.
F.2.16 Outreach and Engagement
The use of outreach and engagement in water management is intended to educate on and encourage good water management to enable the public and various industries to make good water management decisions. Outreach and engagement efforts range from informing and educating the public to empowering the public to take an active role in their local water management. As identified by the California Water Plan 2016 Update, a successful outreach and engagement strategy must be:
• Relevant – Contributes to the missions, goals, and objectives of partner organizations. • Focused – Establishes goals that are measurable, achievable, and targeted toward improving social, economic, environmental, or civic conditions. • Scale-appropriate – Creates designs at local, state, multi-state, or national scales that effectively address the program’s focus. • Innovative – Integrates research findings and collegial knowledge and experience. • Collaborative – Cultivates and nurtures authentic and appropriately diverse partnerships. • Factually and Scientifically Sound — bases strategy on integrated or incorporated knowledge and methods derived from research, and brings together the relevant components of the knowledge system (i.e., research, education, and application) around the problem or issue at stake.
June 2018 F-12 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
• Adaptive – develops and implements continuous feedback and improvement strategies that include strong program planning and evaluation components, and exchanges information about processes, outputs, and outcomes with colleagues at local, state, multi-state, and national levels. • Visible – Interprets processes, outputs, and outcomes in a format that is understandable and accessible to partners and decision-makers. • Effective – Achieves outcomes that meet intended and unanticipated program objectives. • Sustainable – Develops and implements mechanisms to sustain the production of impacts over time, as appropriate to the duration and priority of a public need. • Measurable – Creates a difference that can be tracked and measured
In the Tule River Basin, collaboration between the agricultural community, policy makers, and the public is especially critical when making decisions related to water resources. Currently, multi-disciplinary outreach and engagement takes place in the development of water resource plans and water management projects through public meetings, focus groups, workshops and advisory groups.
Climate change increases the urgency for successful outreach and engagement strategies to manage water resources. Adapting to climate change requires a multi-disciplinary approach to be successful. However, the polarizing nature of climate change makes multi-disciplinary collaboration a challenge. Additionally, miss-information about climate change can lead the public to see climate change as a global, rather than local, issue. Increasing efforts to educate the public on the local impacts of climate change will increase public understanding and encourage multi-disciplinary collaboration.
Although cost, opposing stakeholder viewpoints, and a general lack of understanding of water management can challenge outreach and engagement activities, public outreach and engagement should continue to play a significant role in Water Management within the Tule River Basin IRWMP area.
F.2.17 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage
Due to the variable nature of supply within the Tule River Basin, conjunctive use is the fundamental water management strategy which is employed. By definition, conjunctive use is the coordinated and planned management of both surface and groundwater sources of water supply in order to most efficiently use both supplies. Conjunctive Management entails replenishing groundwater resources with excess surface water during wet years for use during dry years, which increases the reliability of water supplies from year to year. This strategy is an important climate change adaption too by increasing the region’s resiliency to drought.
Conjunctive management is the device utilized to maximize water supply reliability, to reduce the impacts on the groundwater reservoir, to avoid subsidence associated with overdraft and to manage water quality related issues. Each of these issues involves the potential for conflicts. Managing supplies to optimize reliability can vary by crop type and soil type. Timing of delivery of available surface water supplies may be optimum for one landowner/grower, while not providing the same benefit to another. Timing of deliveries to lands on the east side of the Tule River Basin, where citrus crops are dominant, is often different than exists in the center of the Basin and even different yet for uses associated with the westerly lands within the Basin. Timing of deliveries to lands in the west portion of the Basin are critical with respect to dealing with overdraft and resulting subsidence impact issues. Reasons for management for water quality related purposes can range from reducing impacts of adverse conditions by virtue of quantity of
June 2018 F-13 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
flows available for dilution purposes and for purposes of managing salt accumulations below the root zone of permanent plantings.
In practice, conjunctive use involves numerous procedures and facilities, allowing for recharge during times of available surface water supplies, followed by groundwater extraction, either during times of reduced groundwater deliveries to supplement same, or as the entire supply during periods of time when surface water is unavailable for delivery.
Monitoring of groundwater conditions is a critical component to a properly conducted conjunctive use program. Specifically, monitoring of groundwater levels, accumulation of knowledge related to area lithology and performance runs of groundwater models are all required to provide a proper basis for groundwater management to occur. The need for adequate funds to conduct these programs is also of significance.
In an area such as the Tule River Basin, groundwater balance can only be achieved through the employment of proper conjunctive use procedures. Increasing storage in groundwater during times of available surface supplies, in excess of then current demands, is the only mechanism available to offset withdrawals during periods of time when insufficient surface water flows are available to meet demands.
Entities within the Tule River Basin have caused the creation of a groundwater model to assist in the monitoring effort. A model exists for the entire basin with the capability to build a smaller cell size model for use in urban areas. These models allow for changes in land use and crop types to be introduced into the input side of the models and variable supply inputs to be employed to determine the impact on the volume of groundwater in storage as a result of land use or cropping pattern change.
Friant Division, CVP contractors have also engaged in a process to perform an overall examination and inventory related to water resources, identified as their Water Management Plans. Approximate 5-year updates have currently been mandated by the federal government, thus allowing for the most current information technology to be employed. Efforts to improve the basis for the groundwater resource inventory are anticipated to continue in the future based on policy and budget instructions provided by the DCTRA governing board.
To assist in the system balance efforts, DCTRA and its member units have currently in inventory, several hundreds of acres of groundwater recharge basins. This acreage is in addition to the natural channel acreage which is continuously employed as a recharge vehicle. Not satisfied with this level of facilities, DCTRA member units have in development additional areas with funds budgeted, accompanied by outside grant funds and input from other participants in the form of land and/or funding to further augment recharge capabilities.
Currently the water management efforts within the Tule River Basin must allow for management of flows resulting from flood year events such as 1969 and 1983 and provide groundwater benefits in the driest of years. The extent to which climate change may affect the adequacy of the current facilities to deal with the variable nature of runoff, from both timing and volume of flow perspective is a challenge that the local water management entities feel they are up to. Active participation in response to hydrologic and regulatory change exists.
Notwithstanding the success of implementation of conjunctive use operations within the Planning Area, constraints do exist to development of additional conjunctive use facilities. Most obviously amongst these
June 2018 F-14 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
constraints is the availability of land on which to place recharge facilities. Historic efforts have oriented this effort toward lands which are marginal for agricultural purposes due to the quality of the soils or the high-water requirement associated with same. As a significant portion of these lands have already been developed to recharge areas, additional effort must be undertaken to both identify additional areas and to examine incorporation of same into the existing development program without adverse impacts on the agricultural community. Issues associated with additional land purchases continue to rise in significance as land purchase prices have increased dramatically in the last several years and fuel, equipment and labor costs associated with construction of, or improvement to, conveyance facilities to bring water to recharge facilities have also escalated. In addition, power costs related to recovery of recharged water have significantly increased and risk continues to escalate that recharged water flows westerly to areas outside of the target area for benefit. This is principally as a result of significantly decreased entitlement allocations of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project to contract holders. Declining groundwater conditions, to a significant degree based on reduction of outflows to the west, are again returning and where groundwater balance was thought to be achievable a decade ago based on existing cropping patterns and water supply availability programs it is now starting to diminish based on the drastic changes in opportunity to pump project supplies from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta. While deliveries of supply from the Delta are not made to any significant degree for the benefit of landowners specifically within the Tule River Basin, outside of Friant Division, CVP exchange supplies, the withdrawal of deliveries from lands to the west has historically had a significant impact on groundwater conditions within the Basin and it appears that a return to those pre- westside project conditions is returning.
Additional constraints to recharge related programs include recognition of third-party impacts in any planning process and increased participants from local agencies and landowners/growers. Discussions are ongoing with local domestic water purveying entities with respect to altering their historic nonparticipation in groundwater recharge related efforts due to the quantity/quality impacts on their current supply. Principal among those impacts is the movement of contaminants from one area to another based on groundwater gradients introduced as a result of differential pumping based on available surface water supplies.
F.2.18 Desalination
The treatment process for water involving the removal of salts is identified as desalination. This practice involves treating a source of water high in salts to remove said salts and to have as a result, usable water. Within the Tule River Basin, neither sea water nor brackish water from groundwater exists. There currently is, therefore, no available source for desalination within the IRWMP Planning Area. The ability of this method to be a source of water supply is, therefore, not applicable.
F.2.19 Precipitation Enhancement
Weather modification in the form of precipitation enhancement, commonly called “cloud seeding”, has been utilized successfully within the Kings River and the Kaweah River Basin for decades. Utilizing this technology, clouds are artificially stimulated to produce more rainfall or snowfall than they would normally yield over a specific land mass. The technology employed with this enhancement methodology occurs by injecting particles which act as a nucleus into clouds, thereby seeding the clouds with a nucleus around which water molecules can form to enable snowflakes and/or raindrops to form. While cloud seeding has been employed within the adjacent watersheds for decades, it has limited use in dry periods
June 2018 F-15 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
as storm containing water particles are absent and, in years of extreme precipitation, additional precipitation would only augment potential flood damaging flows. For the intervening weather conditions, however, contracted weather modification services involving aircraft seeding storms as they approach the foothills east of the Basin, upwind of the target are available. These aircraft efforts can be augmented by ground-level generators located in foothill and low elevation mountain locations. The primary target is usually the available low-altitude super cooled liquid water that develops in cloud on the east side of the foothill and mountain slopes, those being the windward and upslope areas associated with foothill and mountain barriers. Current estimates of long-term additional runoff are in the neighborhood of five (5) percent.
Of all of the current water supply augmentation steps, climate change could affect the weather modification program to the greatest degree. Disruption of the historic weather patterns around which cloud seeding activities are centered could be significant, thus destroying the forecasting base which has been established and further leading to changes in seeding conditions, the results of which are currently unknown. Of significant impact is the fact that the current nucleus forming agents which are utilized may no longer be applicable if high-altitude temperature patterns change. Nucleus forming agents which operate at temperature conditions well below freezing would be rendered ineffective if these temperature conditions cease to exist or diminished in their frequency.
F.2.20 Recycled Municipal Water
At the current time and for some time, discharges from municipally owned wastewater treatment works have been completely recycled into the environment. For the most part, these supplies are utilized in substitution of groundwater pumping for agricultural purposes and little opportunity has been seen to further enhance the reuse paradigm as it has been complete. Recently, modifications to discharge requirements, particularly to natural streams, have changed such that discharges to natural channels have changed to the extent that such discharges are in a phase of planned obsolescence. They are being replaced with either discharge patterns to adjacent lands where waters of the State are not involved or, in the alternate, discharges are being upgraded to a tertiary level and their use then directed toward new beneficiaries to the exclusion, for the most part, of the traditional pathways.
Significant in the Tule River Basin in this changed paradigm is the availability of a program wherein reclaimed wastewater can be discharged to irrigation canals for direct reuse on a year-round basis. In exchange, entitlement waters of a local irrigation entity, which is the recipient of the treated water, can be rerouted and recharged upstream of a domestic groundwater contractor is a contract position which has not historically existed. While the Tule River Basin, as a whole, would remain in the same balance, the shifting of available surface supplies within the Basin can be altered with the benefits redirected to defined areas within the Basin. The extent to which withdrawal of the treated effluent will have on the historic place of use remains to be seen. In addition, the extent to which such programs will be pursued in the future by discharging entities remains to be seen.
F.2.21 Surface Storage – CALFED
The CALFED Bay-Delta Program, identified as CALFED, was a department within the government structure of the State of California that was focused on Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta water problems, both in-Delta as well as export based. In 2009, CALFED was replaced by the Delta Stewardship Council. “CALFED
June 2018 F-16 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
Surface Storage” is a legacy title for a RMS designed to improve surface storage while improving conditions in the Delta on a parallel basis. The CALFED Surface Storage strategy includes five (5) potential surface storage reservoirs in California. It is not anticipated that any of these efforts will have a significant impact on the Tule River Basin and potentially only an incidental impact on Friant Division-CVP contractors peripheral to the Tule River Basin. It has been determined that this element is not applicable to the subject IRWM Plan.
F.2.22 Surface Storage – Regional/Local
The Tule River Basin seeks to be the recipient of a modification to its surface storage capabilities. Spillway modifications associated with Success Dam would result in an overall increase in storage in the reservoir, along with additional yield development. The reservoir now provides improved downstream flood protection benefits, principally to the City of Porterville and the Tulare Lakebed areas. Additional storage opportunities have been evaluated on Deer Creek and White River, said studies resulting in a lack of feasibility due to environmental constraints and/or economic constraints. While an off-stream storage site was initially investigated as a part of the East-Side Division-CVP, no additional feasibility studies have been initiated, nor are there any likely significant storage opportunities existing within the Tule River Basin. The water rights on the Tule River are fully appropriated, based on action by the State Water Resources Control Board and, as a result, additional storage may result in some reregulation capability, but little to no additional yield capability.
From a climate change perspective, a change in precipitation and/or runoff patterns may result in reduced snow pack and alteration of winter runoff. These changes would require a re- examination of the development of surface storage for water supply purposes during peak growing months and flood control purposes could also change. This would require a re- examination of potential sites, few of which exist based on examinations which have been undertaken to date.
F.2.23 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution
Principal in Tule River Basin IRWM planning activities is that related to the provision of potable drinking water. Significant participation by both disadvantaged community and environmental justice representatives in the Stakeholder Advisory Committee structure has resulted in identification of drinking water problems and pursuit of solutions to these problems utilizing the IRWM structure as a potential solution vehicle. Within the Tule River Basin, groundwater related treatment facilities currently exist for the unincorporated community of Terra Bella and numerous services of the Terra Bella Irrigation District.
Historic efforts have been related to water quality associated with discharges from agricultural uses, with that program having been memorialized in the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The local orientation has the potential to change to examining those opportunities which exist for construction of surface water treatment facilities in identified areas with poor groundwater quality characteristics and potential dedication of portions of agricultural surface water supplies to those facilities. These efforts are in the infant stages and are being supplemented by efforts of the County of Tulare related specifically to the unincorporated area of East Porterville.
June 2018 F-17 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
Primary constraints to pursuit of this method of altering the landscape of domestic water quality include the development of water treatment and distribution systems to serve any candidate areas, elevated operation and maintenance costs, opposition to higher water rates, or in this case, the payment of a water rate at all and the lack of qualified water treatment plant operators.
Factored into the surface water treatment plant equation will have to be impacts of climate change on mineralization and increased turbidity. In addition, if storage of water is required, elevated water temperatures, both as an aesthetic issue, as well as an adverse plant growth inducement cause, will be factors to be dealt with.
Based on experiences currently being generated through similar examinations in out-of- Basin areas, these facilities are felt to be economic to an acceptable degree only if they are regional in nature and resolve many of the identified adverse problems, such as operations problems on a collective basis.
F.2.24 Groundwater Remediation/Aquifer Remediation
Groundwater remediation takes place in specific and infrequent locations within the Tule River Basin. Virtually all of these locations are associated with a vadose zone consisting of a specific plume of contamination caused by a prior surface related activity such as a leaking underground fuel storage tank. This contamination has traveled to free groundwater in the soil profile and requires extracting the contaminated groundwater from an aquifer, or multiple aquifers, treating it and then discharging to an approved location. These discharge locations vary from adjacent water courses, to re-injecting to the ground, to reuse for a beneficial purpose. Remediation does not provide for a new quantity of water, but does provide for a source of water from a previously contaminated source. While a remediated supply is made available, the principal purpose is to prevent the further spread of the specific contaminant, thus rendering additional supply unusable.
F.2.25 Land Use Planning and Management
Historically, land use planning has been conducted by different agencies, on different time schedules and was based on differing policy directives from governing bodies. To a significant extent, this remains the case. Attempts to integrate water management related concerns into land use planning is based on a recognition that there is a direct relationship to water supply and water quality, flood and storm water management and impacts on agricultural water conveyance facilities where urbanized development is involved. While history has proven that many of these relationships are contentious and do not always result in agreement with regard to policy development, the interface nonetheless exists. The principal tool utilized in the Tule River Basin to overcome these differences is education. Coupled with an attitude inviting cooperation, successes have been achieved which overcome the previously predominant aggressively opinionated and argumentative processes. Development of water management related tools such as the numeric groundwater model has offered a new forum for interface between water management agencies and land use planners. In addition, the IRWM forum is being opened to the governmental agencies who carry the charge of land use planning as one of their principal purposes and their involvement, to date, in the IRWM process has led to improved relationships between the participants.
June 2018 F-18 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
Also assisting in the barrier reduction efforts has been the requirement of State and local agencies associated with water supply planning related to land developments to reflect adequacy of supply. This requirement has caused an improvement in relationships between the water management entities and the land development participants as certification of adequacy of water supply is now statutorily required as part of the land development process.
The IRWM process offers a unique forum for this relationship to be further improved. The Stakeholder Advisory Group currently includes individuals responsible for land use planning policy development and implementation , as well as representatives of Disadvantaged Communities, where improvement is needed in the relationship between water managers and land use planners. The types of projects which have been developed and pursued through the IRWM process demonstrate the success of this cooperative approach.
F.2.26 Matching Quality to Use
The strategy of matching water quality to specific beneficial use has little application in the Tule River Basin. Typically, the strategy is to avoid utilizing a higher quality of water for a beneficial use than is required by that beneficial use. As agricultural is the major consumer of water within the Basin, the surface water and groundwater currently available within the Basin are both suitable for agricultural use. Treated wastewater is directed toward lands which meet the requirements for reuse of said supply and surface waters are of very high quality, only requiring treatment for removal of turbidity and bacteriological contamination if utilized for human consumption. If such supplies were to become available in a recognized usable quantity, issues of acceptance of using a lower quality water than otherwise available and the matching of the location of use to the location of availability would become major issues to be evaluated.
F.2.27 Pollution Prevention
Current and applicable water quality guidelines, including Basin Plan criteria, are driven by avoidance of contamination as the principal objective. Reliance on treatment following contamination or pretreating water to allow for “space” to introduce contaminants are, for the most part, discouraged. Where pollution is unavoidable, such as the case with certain municipal and industrial related discharges, regulatory programs exist for removal or reduction of contaminants to an acceptable level based on the beneficial use objectives in existence related to the specific discharge. Current activities related to pollution prevention have started to extend up into the contributory watershed based on drinking water requirements and introduction of flood flows into facilities such as the Friant-Kern Canal, waters in which are utilized for human consumption, following conventional treatment. Extension of efforts into the upper parts of the watershed allows for avoidance of pollutants being introduced into the runoff, further avoiding any significant level of treatment being required.
June 2018 F-19 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.2.28 Salt and Salinity Management
Importation of surface water into the Tule River Basin, domestic discharges such as those associated with home water softening units and certain agricultural practices result in additional salts being discharged, principally to groundwater. High salinity in surface water, soil, or groundwater can have significant negative impact on critical organisms and agricultural productivity.
Options to manage salt and salinity include on-farm drainage management, which involves the placement of crops based on their salt tolerance in conjunction with existing drainage patterns, as well as methods to treat or store salt deposits.
The DCTRA is engaged in several arenas designed to address salinity management. In particular, the DCTRA is engaged in the CV Salts Program and in activities related to Basin Plan Modifications related to the salt topic. The position of the Association with respect to the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP) has recently been handed over to the newly-formed Tule Basin Water Quality Association. Salts management is an issue within the structure of the ILRP to be addressed by the third-party coalition groups covering the irrigated lands within the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.
F.2.29 Urban Runoff Management
Runoff from urban areas is handled within the single incorporated city within the Planning Area by the governing municipality and in unincorporated areas by the County of Tulare. While in all cases, irrigation water conveyance facilities play a major role in conveyance to disposal facilities of urban runoff, it is nevertheless the responsibility of the urban entity to properly address disposal of urban runoff. Urban runoff within the Planning Area typically is comprised of two different sources. The first, and most obvious, is that of storm water runoff comprised principally of rainfall falling on impervious surfaces within the municipality and gathering of that runoff in facilities designed for that purpose with most disposal actions contributing to groundwater recharge.
The second form of water to be managed is that related to nuisance discharges during dry weather periods. These flows are placed in the nuisance category for three (3) principal reasons. The first of these is that they have to be managed during a period of time when facilities utilized for irrigation purposes need the available capacity or occur at a time when maintenance activities need to be conducted and the nuisance flows interfere with such activities. The second issue related to these flows is that many accrue to local storm water facilities where they pond in a shallow depth configuration and pose vector breeding problems which have to be managed at a significant cost, in comparison to the water involved with the discharge activity. The third issue is that related to contamination. While the volume of these flows is low, discharges from urban landscape have been demonstrated to carry significant elevations of contaminants and activities where water is washed into urban gutters carries with it petroleum and petroleum byproducts contamination which often accrues to groundwater.
While principal actions are directed at preventing groundwater contamination, most actions, under current conditions, are limited in nature and, for the most part, ineffective as compared to the total contamination picture. Land conversion based on increased development further exacerbates this condition, less specifically addressed in the new development as compared to the previous agricultural use.
June 2018 F-20 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
F.2.30 Water-Dependent Recreation
As the Tule River and its distributaries flow for only a portion of a given calendar year, little water- dependent recreational opportunity exists. The sole exception is tubing and rafting excursions on a portion of the Tule River during irrigation release periods. Points of ingress and egress for these recreational opportunities are typically associated with public road rights-of way, as little or no access is available through private lands.
With the exception of impacts of climate change which may modify this paradigm in the future, the opportunity is factually limited due to the limited quantity of surface water existing within the Basin. Future updates to the IRWM Plan will need to consider examination of this issue and a determination of whether or not opportunity events have changed to the point where the inclusion of this objective into IRWM Planning needs to be accomplished.
F.2.31 Watershed Management
The watershed feeding Success Reservoir and forming the Tule River exists completely outside of the IRWM Planning Area. As previously noted under the forest related section, planning in this area is almost exclusively under the control of the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Park Service and the Tule River Indian Reservation.
Normal watershed management functions of evaluating policies, land use planning, management of land and resources and fire prevention and fire suppression efforts are all outside the purview of any participating entity in the IRWM process. Input with respect to watershed management from the standpoint of watershed management is virtually nonexistent. Vegetative management, controlled burns and water quality related impacts are dealt with by the agencies of jurisdiction with entities involved in the IRWM process only allowed input in a public forum approach. In most cases, responsible agency status is not invited, nor accepted when requested. The IRWM process is designed to continue to seek input with respect to the programs of the governing agencies and opportunities to coordinate efforts, when appropriate.
F.2.32 Water and Culture
This resource management strategy refers to the consideration of culture when developing and implementing water management strategies, and encourages collaboration with local communities, groups, and Native American tribes to manage water in a way that protects and enhances cultural resources.The Tule River Basin IRWMP area is home to historical and tribal resources. The Tule River Tribe is the most notable cultural entity within the Tule River Basin. The Tule River Tribe has ancient ties to water within the IRWMP area and can provide traditional knowledge to better sustain and integrate water management practices. Native American Tribes must be included in the water management decision process to create sustainability and continue the passage of traditional practices and knowledge to future generations.
A variety of factors can lead to the disruption of cultural resources. In the Tule River Basin, private land owner considerations and a lack of information regarding cultural resources can be major implementation issues when protecting culturally sensitive water resources.
June 2018 F-21 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
Climate change is projected to have a significant impact on water and water dependent resources. Fire, flooding, habitat degradation, and drought resulting from climate change all have the potential to significantly impact cultural resources and the ability of tribal communities to continue their traditional practices. Including tribal communities, such as the Tule River Tribe, in discussions related to climate change adaption and mitigation will contribute to the development of culturally sensitive and sustainable water management practices.
F.3 Resource Management Strategy Review
The RWMG considered the DWR Resource management strategies to expand and diversify the Tule River Basin water management portfolio. RMS were reviewed and selected for incorporation into the IRWM Plan based on their applicability to the region, potential to address climate change impacts, and ability to meet at least one of the IRWMP objectives. If an RMS was not relevant to the region or did not support IRWMP Objectives, a decision was made to not include the RMS into the IRWM Planning process.
Through this process, the following were discluded from the IRWM Planning process.
• Conveyance – Delta • System Reoperation • Desalination • Surface Storage – CALFED • Forest Management
As shown in Table F-1, the RMS that were selected for incorporation into the IRWMP are interrelated, and each contribute to a variety of IRWMP objectives.
Identify if List Identify if RMS Adopt Draft Consider Opportunities RMS meets addreses Findings and each RMS and IRWMP climate Recommendations Constraints Objectives change
Figure F-1. RMS Review Process
June 2018 F-22 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section F – Resource Management Strategies
Table F-1. Tule River Basin Objectives Satisfied by the State Resource Management Strategies
State Resource Management
Strategies
Efficiency
Regional/Local
–
Delta Regional/Local Remediation/Aquifer Remediation
– –
Dependent Recreation - Tule River Basin rge Area Protection Objectives Agricultural Water Use Urban Water Use Efficiency Conveyance Conveyance System Reoperation Water Transfers Flood Risk Management Agricultural Lands Stewardship Economic Incentives (Loans, Grants and Water Pricing) Ecosystem Restoration Recha Sediment Management Outreach and Engagement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage Precipitation Enhancement Recycled Municipal Water Surface Storage Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution Groundwater Land Use Planning and Management Matching Quality to Use Pollution Prevention andSalt Salinity Management Urban Runoff Management Water Watershed Management Water and Culture Conserve, Enhance and X X X X X X X X X X X X X Regenerate Riparian Habitats Conserve and Restore Native X X X X X X X X X X X X Species and Related Habitats Protect Water Resources that are critical to Native American X X X X X X X X X X X X X Tribal Communities Evaluate and Modify Water Diversion and Conveyance X X X X X X X X X X X Infrastructure Meet Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Basin Plan Objectives Management of Recreational Activities to Minimize Impacts X X X X X X X X on Water Resources Promote City, Community and Regional Storm Water X X X X X X X X X X X Management Plans Evaluate and promote strategies to reduce arsenic, nitrate, and perchlorate X X X X X X X X X contamination to levels below maximum contaminant level Increase Monitoring and Promote Research Programs to Better Understand the Effects x x x x of Climate Change on Ecosystems in the Region Plan for Potential Regional Impacts of Climate Change on x x x x x x x x x x Water Quality and Quantity Identify and Promote Strategies for Hydroelectric X X Generation Facilities Protect and Improve Water Resources through Land Use X X X X X X X X X X X Practices Optimize Efficient Use, Conservation and Recycling of X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Water Resources Increase Knowledge Regarding Groundwater Related Conditions and Establish X X X X X X X X X X X X Groundwater Management Practices Reduce Impacts and Optimize Benefits from Assisting Other Drought-Related Areas with X X X X X X Basin-to Basin Transfers of water
June 2018 F-23
Section G Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
G.1 Introduction
This section documents the project review process and contains the following components taken from the 2016 DWR Guidelines (State Guidelines):
1. Procedures for submitting a project to the RWMG 2. Procedures for review of projects considered for inclusion into the IRWM Plan. 3. Climate change considerations 4. Procedures for displaying the list(s) of approved projects
Evaluation of projects/programs in the context of IRWM planning differs from the evaluation of a project by itself. Projects are selected for incorporation into the Final Project List based on their ability to meet IRWMP goals and objectives, compatibility with State Resource Management Strategies, and readiness to proceed. The steps taken to create the Final Project List are broken into 3 phases. These phases are explained in the following sections and summarized below.
Project Solicitation, Scoring, and Selection Process
Phase 1 Abstract Forms Potential project proponents are Phase 1 are accepted and notified of project solicitation reviewed
Readiness to Proceed Objectives Worksheet Supplemental Scoring Phase 2 Worksheet Submitted Submitted and Scored Questions Answered and Scored
Stakeholder Final Ranked Projects are Evaluated Phase 3 Evaluation and Project List for Technical Accuracy Board Approvals Approved
Figure G-1. Project Solicitation, Scoring, and Selection Process
June 2018 G-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
G.2 Phase 1: Project Solicitation and Acceptance of Abstract Forms
The solicitation of projects is sought from potential participating parties within the IRWMP area on a periodic basis prior to the announcement of any funding opportunity. Project solicitation entails sending out a notice of intent to update the IRWM project list and informing potential project proponents that Phase 1 Abstract forms will be accepted.
Phase 1 Abstract forms (See Appendix H) are intended to solicit sponsors for all relevant projects and programs currently being considered throughout the Tule River Basin IRWMP region. Abstract forms collect a wide variety of information on the projects/programs and provide a pass or fail screening to capture only the projects/programs that meet the following conditions:
Condition 1: The project/program must be relevant to Integrated Regional Water Management. (Must satisfy one or more of the questions below)
1. Is it regional? Does the abstract describe the project/program’s purpose and benefit to the region? 2. Is it sponsored or developed by multiple agencies? Does the abstract provide evidence of the project having multiple-agency support or funding? 3. Does the project/program provide cumulative benefit? Does the abstract describe reciprocal benefit with other projects or programs, and/or does the project result in meeting multiple objectives of the IRWMP? 4. Does the project/program support a critical water supply or water quality need within a Disadvantaged Community (DAC) boundary?
Condition 2: The project/program must meet at least one of the IRWM Objectives (See Section E – Goals and Objectives)
Condition 3: The project/program must be related to a resource management strategy selected for use in the IRWM Plan.
The proponents of projects and programs that pass this screening process are contacted and asked to complete the second phase of the solicitation process.
G.3 Phase 2: Project/Program Evaluation and Scoring
Projects and programs that pass Phase 1 screening continue to Phase 2. In Phase 2, project proponents submit an Objectives Worksheet, which is used to assess the project/program’s alignment with IRWMP Goals and Objectives, and a Readiness to Proceed (RTP) Questionnaire, which is used to gauge how far along the project/program is in the planning process. At this level, scoring is based on how many IRWMP objectives the project/program satisfies and how likely the project/program is to be implemented in the near future.
June 2018 G-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
G.3.1 Objectives Worksheet
The Objectives Worksheet (See Appendix H) is used to assess the number of IRWMP objectives the project/program satisfies and how well the project/program corresponds with IRWM Goals and Objectives. In order to give each IRWM Objective equal weight in this scoring process, each Objective is given a total score of 6.25 points.
Table G-1. Objectives Worksheet Scoring
Goal Objectives Points Conserve, Enhance and Regenerate Riparian Habitats 6.25 Maintain or improve the Conserve and Restore Native Species and Related 6.25 health of ecosystems Habitats 18.75 within the region. Protect Water Resources that are critical to Native 6.25 American Tribal Communities Evaluate and Modify Water Diversion and Conveyance Protection of life, 6.25 Infrastructure structure, equipment, and 12.50 Protect and Improve Water Resources through Land 6.25 property from flooding. Use Practices Meet Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board 6.25 Basin Plan Objectives Management of Recreational Activities to Minimize Reduction of 6.25 Impacts on Water Resources contamination of surface Promote City, Community and Regional Storm Water 25 6.25 and groundwater Management Plans resources Evaluate and promote strategies to reduce arsenic, nitrate, and perchlorate contamination to levels below 6.25 maximum contaminant level Increase Monitoring and Promote Research Programs to Better Understand the Effects of Climate Change on 6.25 Expand regional response Ecosystems in the Region to climate change through Plan for Potential Regional Impacts of Climate Change 18.75 6.25 mitigation and adaption on Water Quantity and Quality strategies Identify and Promote Strategies for Hydroelectric 6.25 Generation Facilities Protect and improve water resources through land use 6.25 practices. Optimize efficient use, conservation, and recycling of 6.25 Work toward achievement water resources. of sustainable balanced Increase knowledge regarding groundwater related 25 surface and groundwater conditions and establish groundwater management 6.25 supplies. practices. Reduce impacts and optimize benefits from assisting in other drought-related areas with basin-to-basin 6.25 transfers of water Total Objective Points Possible 100
June 2018 G-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
G.3.2 Readiness to Proceed (RTP) Questionnaire
As the name suggests, the RTP Questionnaire (located in Appendix H) is intended to evaluate a project/program’s readiness to proceed and gauge how far along the project/program is in the planning process. The RTP is based on five questions that each have a maximum score of five points. These questions and respective scoring are shown below in Table G-2.
Table G-2. RTP Questionnaire Scoring
RTP Factor Question Considered Scoring Points How soon can the <1 year 5 project/program be 1-3 years 3 Timeliness implemented without 3-6 years 1 additional funding or >6 years new agreements? 0 Project has detailed documentation, including 5 feasibility studies and completed engineering designs. Does technical Project is partially documented and has documentation exist to Technical reconnaissance and/or feasibility studies but 3 evaluate the technical incomplete or partial designs. Feasibility feasibility of the The project is not well documented, no feasibility project? studies have been completed and the project has not 0 been designed. Environmental documentation is complete. 5 Does the Some studies are completed and a clear plan to project/program have 3 Environmental complete environmental documentation exists. the necessary No environmental studies have been completed and Compliance environmental environmental compliance documents have not been 0 documentation? started. All required permits are obtained or in the process of 5 Does the project have being obtained. required permits or Permit requirements are known and there is a plan Permitting 3 plans to obtain them? and schedule in place to obtain them. Permit requirements are not known. 0 Financial plan and commitments are well defined and include resource commitments to maintenance and 5 operations Financial plan is under development and/or awaiting Is funding for the rate payer and/or funding agency approval. No 3 Funding project secured? defined resource commitments to maintenance and operations exist. Financial plans and commitments have not been established for project implementation or for 0 maintenance and operations. Total RTP Points Possible 25
June 2018 G-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
G.3.3 Supplemental Scoring
The last step in project/program scoring involves the response to the following questions. These factors are weighted heavily as they are important components of the 2016 IRWM Guidelines.
1. Does the project/program contribute to climate change adaption? This may include the following: (If yes, 5 points) • The project address climate change vulnerabilities as identified in Section O – Climate Change. • The project addresses changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
2. Does the project/program contribute to reducing GHG emissions? This may include the following: (If yes, 5 points) • Implementation of the project/program results in the reduction of GHG emissions as compared to project alternatives. • The project/program will help the IRWM region reduce GHG emissions over the 20-year planning horizon. • The project/program will reduce energy consumption.
Objective, RTP, and Supplemental points are combined to give each project/program a total score and develop a preliminary ranked project list. The top scoring projects and programs then continue to phase 3 of the project solicitation process. Direction from the RWMG will help to guide the number of projects/programs that will move onto Phase 3.
G.4 Phase 3: Final Evaluation, Notification, and Selection of IRWM Projects
Once Projects/programs are scored and ranked in Phase 2, projects/programs are evaluated for technical accuracy and the project list is released for public comment. Once the public comment period has ended and stakeholders have reviewed the project list, the RWMG approves a Final Project List and it is incorporated into the IRWMP.
G.5 Updating the Project List
As part of plan implementation, the project list will be updated on an annual basis (or more often as needed) to keep the list of included projects current, comprehensive, and responsive to current conditions. The project solicitation and scoring process described above will be used to update the Full Project List. Updates to the Full Project List will be published as an interim change and will not require re- adoption of the plan. Future IRWM implementation grant opportunities will be offered to the best suited projects/programs.
June 2018 G-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
G.6 Procedures for Displaying List of Approved Projects
A complete list of approved projects will be displayed on the Tule River Basin IRWMP website. This list will be updated annually or more frequently by the DCTRA in response to the annual evaluation of newly proposed projects. The complete list of approved projects, as well as other information related to IRWM Planning in the Tule River Basin, can be found on the following website:
http://www.tuleirwmp.com
G.7 2018 Tule River Basin IRWM Project List
Submitting Project Name Project Description Summary Category Agency Consolidate Alpaugh CSD - Alpaugh and Connect Alpaugh and Allensworth Water Supply Water Quality Allensworth Allensworth Water systems via new pipeline (DAC) Water Project Systems Alpaugh GSA GSP Development Prepare initial GSP technical data and report SGMA Construct a 1,200-acre flood control basin comprised of cells, half mile wide by half mile long White River Flood by eight feet deep, to be used for retention, Angiola Water Climate Change, Control Reservoir detention and recharge. This reservoir will be District Drought, SGMA Project Phase 2 used to prevent flooding of developed farm land and the inhabited areas of two disadvantaged communities, Alpaugh and Allensworth. Construct a half mile wide by two-mile-long by eight feet deep flood control reservoir to be used Angiola Water White River Flood for retention, detention and recharge. This District & Deer Climate Change, Control Reservoir reservoir will be used to prevent flooding of Creek Storm Drought, SGMA Project developed farm land and the inhabited areas of Water District two disadvantaged communities, Alpaugh and Allensworth. Campbell Convert Open Replace ½ mile section of open channel with a Recharge, Moreland Ditch channel Ditch to pipeline to prevent channel losses and increase Drought, Water Company Pipeline efficiency of surface water deliveries to growers. Supply Water Quality, City of Groundwater Increase groundwater recharge basin capacity Drought, SGMA, Porterville Recharge Program around the City of Porterville Recharge Tertiary Treatment Treat the wastewater from the Wastewater Water Quality, City of Facility and Treatment Plan to tertiary requirements and Drought, SGMA, Porterville Distribution return the water in a “purple pipe” system to City Recharge System parks and landscape areas. Drainage Reservoir Extend the Campbell Moreland Ditch Water Quality, City of No. 28 connection approximately 1/2 mile to COP Drainage Reservoir Drought, SGMA, Porterville to Campbell No. 28. Recharge Moreland Ditch
June 2018 G-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
Submitting Project Name Project Description Summary Category Agency Stormwater City of Upgrade City Stormwater distribution system and Drought, SGMA, Recharge Basin Porterville recharge basins Recharge Upgrades Eastern Tule Subbasin GSA GSP Development Prepare initial GSP technical data and report SGMA JPA Install a pipeline distribution system to serve Riparian Lands lands within the Riparian areas of the Tule River Lower Tule River Recharge, Distribution surface water to prevent major channel losses Irrigation District Drought, SGMA System and allow water to be delivered during normal and dry years. SCADA system Update and expand the existing SCADA system Lower Tule River Water Supply, expansion / within the irrigation district to help facilitate more Irrigation District Climate Change upgrades efficient operations. Lower Tule River GSP Development Prepare initial GSP technical data and report SGMA Irrigation District Pioneer Water Existing Pipeline Replace existing sections of the Pioneer Water Drought, Water Company replacement Company pipeline that leaks and is broken Supply Expand the pipeline distribution system in the Northwest Drought, Pixley Irrigation northwest region of the Pixley Irrigation Disstrict Distribution Recharge, water District to prevent major channel losses and allow for System Expansion supply effecient delivery of water SCADA system Update and expand the existing SCADA system Pixley Irrigation Water Supply, expansion / within the irrigation district to help facilitate more District Climate Change upgrades efficient operations. Pixley Irrigation GSP Development Prepare initial GSP technical data and report SGMA District Meter Upgrade / Upgrade / Replace water meters to more Tea Pot Dome SGMA, Water Replacement accurately measure water consumption within Water District Demand Program the district. Tea Pot Dome Efficiency Install Variable frequency drives at 3 pumping Water Supply, Water District Improvements stations to increase energy effeciency. Climate Change Supplemental Tea Pot Dome Implement solar projects to supply power to Solar Power Climate Change Water District pumping plant sites. Program SCADA system Expand and upgrade existing SCADA system to Tea Pot Dome Water Supply, expansion / better manage water distribution and treatment Water District Recharge upgrade. equipment. Tri-County GSP Development Prepare initial GSP technical data and report SGMA Water Authority
June 2018 G-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization
Submitting Project Name Project Description Summary Category Agency Utilize grant funding to incentivize and encourage agricultural and domestic well operators to install flow meters which will enhance groundwater Flow Meter resource management and to improve Tri-County SGMA, Water Installation groundwater extraction data collection which will Water Authority Supply Incentive Project be used by Tri-County Water Authority, a SGMA Groundwater Sustainability Agency, in the development and implementation of its Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Tri-County Infiltration Well Develop an infiltration well and recharge test Water Authority and Direct system pilot protocol and study the feasibility of Recharge, & Angiola Water Recharge Pilot groundwater recharge in the southwest area of Drought District Program the Tule sub-basin. Terra Bella Irrigation District Expand DCTRA Recharge, Expand the current DCTRA sinking basins & Saucelito Sinking Basins Drought Irrigation District Porterville Pump Distribution Develop a pumped distribution system from Water Supply, Irrigation District System on Poplar Friant Kern Canal east SGMA, Drought Vandalia Water Stormwater Runoff Upgrade the stormwater basins to capture runoff Recharge District Basin Upgrades and prevent erosion Tule River Basin Stormwater Develop a Tule River Basin-wide Stormwater Recharge, IRWM Management Plan Management Plan SGMA, Drought
June 2018 G-8
Section H Plan Benefits and Impacts
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
H.1 Introduction
This section contains a significant level of discussion of the benefits and impacts of plan implementation to help stakeholders understand the potential benefits and impacts of implementing the IRWM Plan. This section uses two methods to examine the benefits and impacts associated with IRWMP implementation. The first involves consideration of the IRWM Plan’s overall goals and objectives in relation to Resource management strategies. The second involves discussion of the benefits and impacts of IRWMP implementation in consideration of the following:
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Climate Change • Disadvantaged and Tribal Communities • Other Resources • Adjacent IRWMP Regions
H.2 Consideration of Goals and Objectives
The purpose of implementation of the IRWMP is to provide benefits that support and achieve the overall IRWMP vision, goals, and Objectives of the Tule River Basin area. Benefits will be accomplished through comprehensive management of water resources in a practical, cost effective, and responsible manner. The following table describes the potential benefits and impacts associated with implementation of the IRWMP Goals.
Table H-1. Benefits and Impacts of Resource Management Strategies
Strategy Benefits Impacts • Reduced groundwater recharge • Redirect supply • Lost revenue if usage based • Reduced application cost • Causes operational changes Agricultural • More efficient use of chemicals • Irrigation hardware needed Water Efficiency • Reduced subsurface drainage • Hardware maintenance Irrigator • Protection of water quality training requirements • Reduction of spills • Redirect supply • Reduced supply/distribution • Causes operational changes Costs • Lost revenue if usage based Urban Water • Reduced home chemical use • Inconvenient watering times Efficiency • Delayed capital costs • Creates hard demand that reduces • Protection of water quality opportunities for drought response • Reduced energy use
June 2018 H-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
Strategy Benefits Impacts • Reduced groundwater overdraft • Reduced wastewater production • Maintain water rights • Conjunctive use • Increased use of facilities • Improved water quality Conveyance – • Shortened maintenance periods • Increased flood control Regional/local • Increased costs for larger • capabilities • facilities • Deliver surface water to areas • that use only groundwater • Efficient use of surface supplies • Loss of annual local water supply • Revenue generation Water Transfers • Groundwater mining • Groundwater recharge • Environmental impacts • Agricultural sustainability • Dry year supply • Extends use of existing basin • Increased pumping costs compared to • capacity surface water Conjunctive • Overdraft reduction • Litigation challenges Management • Improved water supply • Increased data collection needs and and reliability costs Groundwater • Groundwater recharge • Uncertainty of facility impacts to Storage • Improved groundwater neighbors management • Facility capital costs • Water quality improvement • Land use changes for facilities • Reduction in flood impacts • Quick project development Precipitation • Accuracy of location and • Increase in water supply Enhancement • timing • Power development • Increased operations and maintenance • Reliable supply cost Recycled • Improved water quality • Public acceptance Municipal Water • Allows for development • Water quality concerns with microbial • Drought resistant supply contaminants, salinity, heavy metals and pharmaceuticals • Permitting requirements • Water supply reliability and • Environmental mitigation • augmentation • Cost • Flood control • Limited sites available Surface Storage • Hydroelectric power generation • Failure impacts - Regional/Local • Recreation • Beneficiary determination • Sediment transport • Property tax losses management • Habitat losses • Operational control
June 2018 H-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
Strategy Benefits Impacts • Protect public health Drinking Water • Increased O&M costs • Maintain regulatory compliance Treatment and • Increasingly stringent • Regionalization/Consolidation Distribution • regulations of facilities • Contamination spread abated Groundwater • Costly • Protect public health Remediation/ • Highly trained operations staff • Maintain regulatory compliance Aquifer • Public perception/acceptance of • Avoided costs of purchasing Remediation treated water additional supply • Best use of available local water • Possible environmental impacts Matching supplies • Infrastructure costs Quality to Use • Most economical choice • Conveyance costs • Treatment avoided or limited • Improved water quality • Increased regulations • Consistent with antidegradation Pollution • Increased costs policies Prevention • Increased management needs • More cost effective than “end • Increased monitoring costs of the pipe” treatment • Water source for local recharge • Improve flood protection • Reduce surface water pollution • Minimize soil erosion and sedimentation problems • Cost to treat and manage runoff • Local resource from waters • Increased cost to urban Urban Runoff historically lost to an area • developments Management • Mimic natural hydrologic Cycles • Vector breeding • Groundwater contamination potential
• Structural approaches are costly • Enhanced flood protection • Permitting requirements involved • Reduce risk to lives and • Long term ongoing maintenance of Flood Risk property facilities Management • Recharge possible if captured • Emergency response planning required • Riparian habitat improvements • Planning may limit development in • Possible floodplain restoration some areas • Revisions to flood insurance mapping • Reduces pressure to agricultural Agricultural • Conservation easement costs • lands from urban development Lands • Cost to implement BMPs • Increased economic viability for Stewardship • Reduction in tax base agricultural lands • Habitat improvement
June 2018 H-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
Strategy Benefits Impacts • Encourages agricultural practices which also benefit environmental and restoration concerns • Decreased costs for grant Economic • Burdensome application processes recipients Incentives • Increased federal or state directives in • Reduced wait for needed (Loans, Grants local issues infrastructure and Water • Increased administrative costs • Reduction in water demand Pricing) • Funding is intermittent from water pricing structures • General quality of life increase • Increased short term costs to goods Ecosystem • Protection and enhancement of and services Restoration fish and wildlife resources • Water supply loss • Species recovery • Improved communication among different agencies • Proper planning helps ensure new developments have Land Use reliable and sufficient water • Difficulty in getting some land and Planning and supplies water use planners to cooperate Management • Potential for reduced water • Increased costs to coordinate efforts demands based on development designs • Opportunities to reduce flooding and increase recharge • Community level solutions Watershed • Water quality improvement • Difficulty of diverse stakeholders Management • Protection of local water rights working together • Flow attenuation • Drought water supply reliability • Introduction of wildlife, weeds, pests Crop Idling for • Stable farm income in water and trash dumping to the area Water Transfers short years • Changes to local community way of life • Taxpayer burden of land cost • Increased management costs of • Generation of stable water government owned retired lands Irrigated Land supplies • Lower income and higher Retirement • Reduction in agricultural unemployment drainage to an area • Growth inducement • Security needs
June 2018 H-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
H.3 Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Project Benefits/Impacts Analysis
Climate change mitigation can be achieved by reducing energy demands, improving energy efficiency and carbon sequestration. These will help to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere. Climate change mitigation will require global cooperation, but the Regional Water Management Group supports reasonable efforts to make their own local contribution. As a result, it has been determined to consider impacts to GHG when selecting and prioritizing projects. This criterion will generally be a lower priority than water supply or water quality, but it is still considered an applicable criteria. When projects are reviewed and prioritized the project proponents will need to address the following:
1. Will this project increase greenhouse gas emissions? If yes, explain how and quantify; and 2. Will this project result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions? If yes, explain how and quantify.
H.4 Consideration of Climate Change in Benefits/Impact Analysis
Climate change has the potential to cause adverse effects on the region, including changes in the timing and amount of precipitation, increased evaporation and transpiration from higher temperatures, increased frequency of droughts and floods, reduction in water quality, increased wildfires and increased presence of certain pests. Developing projects that can address these issues is a desired goal. When projects are reviewed and prioritized, their contribution to addressing climate change will be considered. In particular, project proponents will need to address the following:
1. Will the proposed project reduce vulnerability to anticipated impacts from climate change? If yes, explain and quantify 2. Will the proposed project help the IRWM Planning Area to adapt to climate change impacts, or increase resiliency to climate change impacts? If yes, explain and quantify 3. Will the proposed project help to increase the region’s understanding of climate change impacts and local vulnerabilities? If yes, please explain.
H.5 Consideration of DACs and Tribal Communities in Benefits/Impacts Analysis
Projects to implement the IRWM Plan can have unanticipated effects on DAC’s and Tribal Communities. Because of this, it is important to consider impacts and benefits to DAC’s and Tribal Communities during both the planning and project implementation process.
The majority of communities within the IRWM planning area would be considered economically disadvantaged. Evaluating the benefits and impacts that water management projects may have on these communities is essential to establishing social equity and maintaining regional vitality.
The Tule River Tribe is the only Tribal community in proximity to the IRWM planning area. The Tule River Tribal reservation is located upstream from the IRWM planning area and is entirely outside of the IRWMP boundary. Although the reservation is located outside of the IRWM planning area, it is important to recognize the potential impacts that water management projects may have on the reservation and the cultural resources of Tribal communities.
June 2018 H-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
Steps have been taken in recent years to foster engagement between all parties within the Tule River Basin, including tribal and environmental justice representatives, in the IRWMP development and improvement process. Multiple parties with specific DAC ties have a voting seat on the IRWM Stakeholders Advisory Group and can actively participate at the IRWM Plan governance and policy development levels. Specific benefits accrue to all participants as a result of the engagement of these stakeholders and representatives including the following:
• Forum for discussion – The IRWM process provides an opportunity for DAC, environmental justice and tribal stakeholders and representatives to discuss water management issues, including problems, concerns and priorities. It also allows for DAC – non DAC project coordination; • Creation of and dissemination of information – the opportunity to develop and/or share information is facilitated by meetings of DAC/EJ stakeholders and representatives and water management professionals in the IRWM setting. Opportunity to interface with state and county regulators is also facilitated. Meetings are conducted pursuant to Brown Act regulations and minutes are taken and kept; and • Funding opportunities – The forum created by the IRWM Plan process offers specific opportunity to access information regarding funding to be provided and further offers unique opportunity to coordinate projects otherwise difficult to tie together. The DCTRA IRWM Plan offers special opportunity for participation for DACs, including opportunity for advanced and technical planning assistance for designated projects.
Projects will be evaluated based on their benefits and impacts to tribal and disadvantaged communities. In particular, project proponents will need to address the following:
1. Does the proposed project include sufficient outreach effort to engage tribal and disadvantaged communities? 2. Will the proposed project address concerns expressed by tribal and/or disadvantaged communities? 3. Will the proposed project ultimately provide specific benefits to critical water issues for Native American Tribal communities? 4. Will the proposed project promote environmental justice?
H.6 Consideration of Other Resources in Benefit/Impacts Analysis
Implementation of the IRWMP will result in benefits and impacts to other resources that are not the focus of this document. For this reason, the IRWM Plan sets forth a minimum set of resource-specific impacts which must be considered prior to project development and evaluation. These areas of potential impact must be evaluated must be evaluated for every water management project. Some elements may be covered by CEQA analysis required for the project. The following resources identified by the Stakeholders Advisory Group are anticipated to be evaluated prior to project implementation.
1. Aesthetic/visual resources; 2. Agricultural resources; 3. Air quality; 4. Biological resources; 5. Cultural resources;
June 2018 H-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section H – Plan Benefits and Impacts
6. Environmental Justice/Disadvantaged Communities; 7. Geology and soils; 8. Hazards and hazardous materials; 9. Hydrology and water quality; 10. Land use and planning; 11. Noise; Population and housing; 12. Public services; Recreation; 13. Transportation and circulation; and 14. Utilities/service systems.
These topics can be addressed in either the required technical report associated with the project, or in a separate dedicated document. If sufficient reference is supplied, each of these topics can be addressed in the project’s environmental document(s).
June 2018 H-7
Section I Plan Performance and Monitoring
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring
Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring
I.1 Introduction
This Section defines the Plan Performance and Monitoring Strategy. The IRWM Plan legislation and 2016 IRWMP standards require that IRWM Plans include performance measures and a monitoring program to document progress towards IRWM Plan Objectives, and methodologies to evaluate the implementation of projects and adjust the IRWMP when new information or resources become available.
The purpose of the Plan Performance and Monitoring strategy is to document how the IRWM Plan Objectives are to be measured and how the projects will be overseen and evaluated in order to ensure the anticipated IRWM Plan objectives are being met. This section also describes the method to report the Tule River Basin Region’s progress in meeting the objectives and implementing projects.
Performance measures and monitoring methods are developed and used to evaluate the overall progress in meeting each objective. The results of the performance and monitoring effort will be used by the District, referred to as lead agency, to measure and track success, prepare progress reports to the RWMG, and present IRWM Plan results to public and stakeholders to maintain and gain further support for the IRWM Plan. These processes are described in more detail below.
The Lead Agency is responsible for:
• IRWM Plan implementation, evaluation, and monitoring the overall performance in meeting the Goals and Objectives • Reaching out to local stakeholders of each Sub-Region and update the Sub-Region Priorities • Annually evaluating the performance for implementing projects that contribute to meeting the overall Goals and Objectives • Tracking all project sponsors, including aggregating reports of specific projects performance, and monitoring • Budgeting resources to ensure the monitoring efforts are affordable given the limited resources of the project sponsors and lead agency
The annual review by the RWMG contributes to an adaptive management strategy that will help guide changes to the IRWM Plan in the future. It will be used to facilitate discussion of “lessons learned” from project-specific monitoring efforts. IRWM Plans should be adjusted annually in response to monitoring results and as more effects of Climate Change manifest, new tools are developed, and new information becomes available.
June 2018 I-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring
I.2 Performance Measures and Monitoring Methods
Measurement methods have been developed to evaluate IRWM Plan performance measures for the objectives presented in Section E. Section E provides a qualitative and/or quantitative performance measure to assess each of the IRWM Plan Objectives. For the purposes of this section, the measures have been combined in one column in the table below. The monitoring methodology for each objective has been added.
These measurement methods should be updated as new tools are developed and new information becomes available. The results of the performance and monitoring effort will be used by the District, referred to as lead agency, to measure and track success, prepare progress reports to the RWMG, and present IRWM Plan results to public and stakeholders to maintain and gain further support for the IRWM Plan.
Table I-1. Table displaying performance measures and monitoring methods to evaluate objectives.
Objectives Performance Measures Monitoring Methods Increasing number of acres preserved for ecosystem Create list of new projects and restoration and/or preservation. 1. Conserve, enhance opportunities and any specific
and regenerate species benefits. Report on status of Increasing number of acres of riparian habitats maintenance of existing inventory of healthy or improved natural riparian habitat recharge areas associated with riparian corridors. Report status of current protection 2. Conserve and Increasing number of acres and restoration efforts. Report as to restore native preserved or restored for native new facilities opportunities and species and related species and their related habitats development of project related habitats benefits Report evaluation efforts and conclusions from tribal communities 3. Protect Water Decreasing number of comments related to water resources. Report Resources that are or complaints from tribal on actions taken in response to critical to Native communities regarding loss, or tribal community outreach. American Tribal potential loss, of quality or quantity Communities of their water supplies. Evaluate projects based on their potential benefit to critical water issues of tribal communities
June 2018 I-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring
Objectives Performance Measures Monitoring Methods Increasing improvement in existing water diversion and conveyance infrastructure
Increasing number of studies to 4. Evaluate and modify evaluate functionality and water diversion and Report on project planning, design sustainability of existing water conveyance and construction activities diversion and conveyance infrastructure infrastructure.
Increasing number of miles of water diversion and conveyance infrastructure Report efforts, successes and 5. Protect and improve failures relative to efforts associated Increasing level of management water resources with land use policy development over land use practices to prevent through land use and implementation as those impacts to water resources. practices policies effect water resource planning and implementation Report specific IRWM Participant successes in planning and/or 6. Meet applicable implementation of water resource Increase in the overall level of Regional Water related projects. Report failures management and governance Quality Control within the Tule Basin to meet the through adopted Basin Board Basin Plan Basin Plan objectives and if a Management Plans. objectives Participant project would have a beneficial impact on the cause of the failure 7. Management of Increasing number of programs Report recent test results indicating recreational with the intent to minimize presence/absence of impacts and activities to recreation related water resource educational efforts undertaken to minimize impacts on impacts reduce impacts water resources 8. Promote city, Decrease the number of Report modifications to existing community and communities without a Storm plans and any new plans designed to regional storm water Water Management Plan meet the goals of this objective management plans (Objective = 0) 9. Evaluate and promote strategies to reduce arsenic, Report data collected, observed nitrate, and trends, recognized impacts and Decreasing arsenic, nitrate, and perchlorate areas requiring additional mitigation perchlorate levels. contamination to regarding arsenic, nitrate, and levels below perchlorate contamination. maximum contamination level.
June 2018 I-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring
Objectives Performance Measures Monitoring Methods 10. Increase Monitoring and Promote Research Programs Increasing number of Report data collected, observed to Better projects/programs to trends, recognized impacts and Understand the study/monitor the effects of areas requiring additional mitigation Effects of Climate climate change on ecosystems in regarding climate change impacts on Change on the region ecosystems in the region Ecosystems in the Region Increasing number of 11. Plan for Potential projects/programs intended to Report data collected and evaluation Regional Impacts of increase regional resiliency with of changes needed to address Climate Change on regard to climate change impacts impacts that are other than those Water Quantity and on water quantity and water projected to occur Quality quality
12. Identify and Report on planning, design and Increase the number of promote strategies implementation efforts related to Hydroelectric generation facilities for hydroelectric new hydroelectric generation within the Region generation facilities facilities 13. Optimize efficient Report data collected and evaluate Increase number of use, conservation changes in Tule Basin water projects/programs related to water and recycling of conditions and approaches to use, conservation and recycling water resources conservation and recycling 14. Increase knowledge regarding Report data collected, observed groundwater Existence of public education trends, recognized impacts and conditions and programs for groundwater areas requiring additional policy establish management efforts to promote direction and/or project groundwater them development management practices 15. Reduce impacts and optimize benefits Report efforts undertaken to from assisting other Existence of adequate facilities to facilitate Basin-to- Basin transfers. drought related give and accept basin-to-basin Report on status of return areas with Basin-to- transfers of water. obligations related to prior Basin transfers of assistance transfers water
June 2018 I-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring
I.2.1 Evaluation of Capacity to Evaluate and Implement Projects
The project development process, culminating in project evaluation using the adopted criteria and scoring system currently in place, is designed to be periodically reviewed. This review process includes not only the response of the scoring criteria and scoring system to funding offer guidelines, but also with respect to the quality of the projects being proposed and, most importantly from an IRWMP perspective, the degree to which efforts were undertaken to integrate projects together for improved efficiencies, reduced capital and operation and maintenance costs, or both. It remains to be determined by the Board of Directors of DCTRA as to whether this evaluation will be placed on a routine calendar schedule, similar to other plan review processes which are in place within DCTRA, or will remain on an “as-needed” basis.
I.2.2 Project-Level Performance and Monitoring Plan
The project sponsor is responsible for development of the project and for developing the monitoring and reporting program(s) necessary to define the degree of satisfaction of intended project goals. The project sponsor is also responsible to convey such information to the IRWM RWMG and Stakeholders Advisory Group as is necessary to clearly define project benefits and required progress as against pre-agreed to benchmarks.
Project Monitoring Elements
The following sets forth the established minimum elements of a project monitoring and reporting program. The final project monitoring and reporting program is to be submitted to the DCTRA prior to completion of construction and disbursement of the final funds due pursuant to any applicable funding agreement. The elements are as follows:
1. Project description including a narrative description of the project site(s); 2. Project location including GPS coordinates and location map; 3. IRWM Plan objective(s) targeted; 4. Workplan including a detailed division of project elements; 5. Schedule including construction start and completion dates and applicable permit elements; 6. Description of operation & maintenance elements and issues related to optimum implementation; 7. Quantify costs and identify funding opportunities for construction elements, operation & maintenance elements and oversight reporting elements; 8. Desired goals described in sufficient detail to allow for use as benchmark against which to measure success; 9. Monitoring elements including: a. CEQA/NEPA mitigation elements; b. General monitoring categories: i. Rates and quantities of flow; ii. Water quality parameters; iii. Depths to groundwater; iv. Flood frequency; v. Habitat Development; vi. Species inventory; and
June 2018 I-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section I – Plan Performance and Monitoring
vii. Operation & maintenance activities; and c. Frequency of monitoring and reporting activities; 10. Data management; 11. Responsible parties; and 12. Conclusions and observations.
Project Reporting Elements
The reporting element shall be sufficient in content to allow for the following information to be conveyed: (1) Satisfaction of IRWM Plan objective(s); (2) Success of project against benchmark goal(s); (3) Financing goals achieved; (4) Budget compliance; and (5) Satisfaction of operation & maintenance requirements.
Monitoring Period
The project proponent shall submit to the RWMG an outside target time period for conclusion of monitoring and reporting activities. In no case shall such time period be less than five (5) years. In the event of lack of agreement with respect to said time period, the default shall be to have same established by the Director of the Department of Water Resources.
June 2018 I-6
Section J Data Management
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
Section J – Data Management
J.1 Introduction
Data management is a regional effort amongst stakeholders to measure and report accurate information. Data Management plays a significant role in the implementation the IRWM Plan. Data management includes all activities that further the knowledge and ability to describe the Tule River Basin region (see Section C – Region Description), to capture changes in the region over time, and to monitor Plan performance. As an activity of the IRWM Plan implementation, the RWMG understands the importance of data management when used for assessing progress in water resources management and reporting progress of management activities to the region’s stakeholders.
This section of the IRWM Plan is developed to address the Data Management Standards of the California Department of Water Resources’ Guidelines for Integrated Regional Water Management Plans, dated July 2016. According to these standards an IRWM Plan must:
“describe the process of data collection, storage, and dissemination to IRWM participants, stakeholders, the public, and the State. Data in this standard may include, but is not limited to technical information such as designs, feasibility studies, reports, and information gathered for a specific project in any phase of development including the planning, design,
construction, operation, and monitoring of a project.”
The guidelines also provide an overview of the minimum requirements for the Data Management Section of an IRWM Plan:
1. A brief overview of the data needs within the IRWM region 2. A description of typical data collection techniques 3. A description of how stakeholders contribute data to DMS 4. The entity responsible for maintaining data in the DMS 5. A description of the validation or quality assurance/quality control measures that will be implemented by the RWMG for data generated and submitted for inclusion into the DMS 6. An explanation of how data collected for IRWM project implementation will be transferred or shared between members of the RWMG and other interested parties throughout the IRWM region, including local, State, and federal agencies 7. An explanation of how the DMS supports the RWMG’s efforts to share collected data 8. An outline of how the data saved in the DMS will be distributed and remain compatible with State databases including CEDEN, Water Data Library (WDL), and CASGEM.
June 2018 J-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
J.2 Data Needs within the IRWM Region
A variety of high quality data is needed to adequately manage and monitor water resources on a regional scale. This section will describe the data needed, the source of the data, how it is collected, and it’s applicability for upload to a state or federal database system. The most significant statewide databases pertaining to water management planning include:
• California Environmental Data Exchange Network – CEDEN is a network designed to facilitate integration and sharing of environmental data collected by a variety of participants. Templates to submit data to CEDEN are available on the CEDEN website: http://www.ceden.org. • Water Data Library (WDL) – The Department of Water Resources maintains the State’s WDL which stores data from various monitoring stations. A variety of data is available in the WDL, including groundwater level wells, water quality stations, surface water stage and flow sites, rainfall/climate observers, and well logs. Information regarding the WDL can be found at: http://wdl.water.ca.gov/. • California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program – Water Code §10920 et seq. establishes a groundwater monitoring program requiring the monitoring and reporting of groundwater elevations in all or part of a basin or sub-basin. Requirements of the CASGEM Program can be found at the following link: http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/casgem/. • Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program –The State Water Resources Control Board enforces and establishes standards for SWAMP. Under SWAMP, any group collecting or monitoring surface water quality data, using funds from Propositions 13, 40, 50, 84 and 1 must report such data to the SWAMP database. More information on SWAMP is available at the following link: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp. • Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment program – The Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program is a groundwater quality monitoring program established by the State Water Resources Control Board. The stated mission of GAMA is to “provide data, information, and tools to enable the public and decision makers to better assess groundwater quality and quantity.
J.3 Current Data Programs and Data Collection Techniques
J.3.1 Groundwater Elevations
Data on groundwater levels are used to evaluate groundwater movement and storage conditions. Groundwater contour maps showing lines of equal elevation of the groundwater surface indicate the direction of groundwater movement and also can be used to develop estimates of groundwater flow entering or leaving the management area. Maps of depth to groundwater can provide insight into the distribution of pumping lifts and resultant energy cost for extraction. Maps showing changes in groundwater levels, when used in conjunction with data on specific yield, can also be used to estimate changes in groundwater storage.
The member districts of the DCTRA regularly measure groundwater levels in approximately 300 wells. These wells are shown on Appendix F: Well Location Map. Measurements are taken twice a year, once in the Spring (February) and again in the Fall (October). The current monitoring networks will be maintained or enhanced to assure the availability of sufficient data for the preparation of groundwater level and depth
June 2018 J-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
contour maps. Measurement of groundwater levels will continue to be performed twice a year in order to show seasonal variations.
In addition to the wells measured by the DCTRA members, additional groundwater data is collected from readily available sources such as the Tulare County and the Department of Water Resources. Although this data does not have the consistency and standardization of the wells measured by the member districts, this data is used for analyzing overall trends in groundwater levels. The DCTRA Annual Report summarizes both the historical and current groundwater trends within the Basin, based upon data collected and made available each year.
J.3.2 Stream Flow
Stream flow data is used to evaluate surface water supplies and support flood protection activities. The two major streams in the region are Deer Creek and the Tule River. Both streams are monitored by USGS through the USGS National Streamflow Information Program (NSIP), which operates and maintains approximately 7,500 stream gauges. The data provided by these gauges is accurate and unbiased. USGS stream gauges are located at the outlets of both Deer Creek and the Tule River and measure streamflow from their respective accounting units in real time. Measurements are often made by depth and flow using a staff gauge and known relationship between water depth and channel flow.
J.3.3 Precipitation, Weather, and Climate Change
Precipitation and weather data is used to evaluate water supply, flood risk, evapotranspiration rate, and agricultural applied water demand. Precipitation and weather data is collected through the California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS), which is a program under the California Department of Water Resources. The CIMIS program consists of a network of over 145 automated weather stations in California. CIMIS weather stations collect and report precipitation and climate data on a minute-by- minute basis and are considered to be highly accurate. The IRWMP area contains one CIMIS station, which is located approximately one mile east of the City of Porterville.
Climate Change projections for the region were taken from Cal-Adapt, a web-based climate adaption planning tool under the California Energy Commission. This report utilized information on projected wildfire risk, annual high temperature, and inches of precipitation per decade. More detailed information regarding the use of this data is available in Section L – Technical Analysis. Although all climate projections have a degree of uncertainty, data presented in Cal-Adapt represents the best science available to predict local climate change impacts.
J.3.4 Reservoir Storage and Release Flows
Success Reservoir is the primary water reservoir related to the IRWMP region and provides flood control and surface water storage to the IRWMP region. Success Reservoir controls run-off from snow melt and precipitation during the flood season. After the flood season, the captured run-off can be released to satisfy the water demands of downstream districts.
June 2018 J-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers owns and operates Success Reservoir and is agency responsible for measuring storage capacity and monitoring surface water levels and release flows. Reservoir storage is usually calculated based on the depth at the dam or discharge point. Release flows are measured through flow depth or flow meters in discharge pipelines. Surface water levels and release flows are measured daily and the data is considered to be highly reliable.
J.3.5 Point and Non-Point Pollution Discharge
As authorized by the Clean Water Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requires all persons or agencies discharging pollutants from a point source into any waters of the united states to obtain a NPDES permit or a Waste Discharge Requirement from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Permit holders must monitor and report on the following discharge parameters:
• Flow • Pollutants listed in the terms of the permit conditions • Pollutants that could have a significant impact on the quality of the receiving streams • Pollutants specified as subject to monitoring by EPA regulations • Other pollutants for which the EPA requests monitoring in writing
Each of these monitoring parameters must be measured at the frequency specified in the NPDES permit, WDR, or at intervals sufficiently frequent to yield data that would characterize the nature of the discharge. EPA conducts inspections of facilities subject to the regulations to determine compliance.
J.3.6 Groundwater Quality
Monitoring of groundwater quality provides the information required to determine the suitability of groundwater for various beneficial uses. Compiled groundwater quality data for the Plan area does not currently exist. The DCTRA participants will develop protocols to obtain groundwater quality data from readily available regulatory agencies that collect this data from domestic water providers, farmers, and dairies. Currently data from the community water systems within the basin is collected through the Consumer Confidence Reports. Other additional data that is readily available will be analyzed and reported within the Annual Report each year.
The sampling of the DCTRA participant wells will be expanded, if needed, to provide sufficient data to allow identification of areas where water quality is of concern. Supplemental sampling may also be performed to better define localized areas of impaired water quality. Testing will typically include standard agricultural type analysis, but may also include additional constituents as required. The current strategy is to continue to find other sources of readily available data to begin monitoring yearly trends in groundwater quality throughout the Basin.
June 2018 J-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
J.3.7 Surface Water Quality
Water Quality measurements in surface waters assess environmental and human health risks over time. The IRWMP region has three main sources of surface water supply, the Tule River, Deer Creek, and the Central Valley Project. Imported surface water from the Central Valley Project generally originates in the San Joaquin River watershed (Friant-Kern Canal). The Friant-Kern Canal is monitored annually by Reclamation District 770, and by the Terra Bella Irrigation District at irregular intervals.
Tule River and Deer Creek are local surface water sources and their quality is monitored by several agencies. The Tule River is monitored annually by Reclamation District 770 and seasonally by the Tule River Association. The San Joaquin Valley Water Quality Coalition monitors both the Tule River and Deer Creek at irregular intervals through an ILRP Waiver Program.
J.3.8 Land Use and Population
Land use monitoring refers to the deliberate action of collecting data on land use over time as part of an overall effort to understand the region and what changes might be affecting managed water resources. Local jurisdiction Planning departments and the State Department of Finance harvest and create land use and population data for use in making land use policy decisions.
Population data comes from U.S. Census data. Historical data is used to identify trends in population distribution. Population data is used to estimate future water demand and calculate per capita water use.
J.3.9 Agricultural Water Demand
Agricultural water demand is a major component of water management in the IRWMP area. Agricultural water demand values were taken from the Agricultural Water Management Plans of each district within the region. Under the 2009 Water Conservation Act, agricultural water suppliers with more than 25,000 irrigated acres are required to develop a water management plan. In doing so, each district calculates water demand using crop type, crop acreage, and precipitation/weather data.
Because most wells within the region are privately owned, data on the actual quantity of water extracted is difficult to obtain. The values presented in Agricultural Water Management Plans represent approximate water demand based on all known factors.
J.3.10 Urban Water Demand
The primary source of data regarding urban water demand came from the Porterville Urban Water Management Plan, as the City of Porterville is the only urban water management planning area within the IRWMP boundary. This water management district is 100% metered, so the reported water use data is considered highly accurate. Water Meters are read monthly in normal water years and more frequently in drought years.
June 2018 J-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
J.4 Regional Data Management System
The DCTRA currently maintains a database in which is contained information necessary to support operating the numeric groundwater model and in preparation of the various reports which it currently publishes including the Annual Groundwater Management Reports, the annual update to and five-year Water Management Plans required under Friant Division, CVP member units’ contracts with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and publication of the various reports associated with the Tule River Association. The following data is contained and maintained in the regional data management system:
• Groundwater Levels • Groundwater Quality • Precipitation • Subsidence • Surface Water Quality • Surface Water Quantity
In addition to this database, a complete water quality database related to surface water is maintained. Constituents monitored within that program are listed below. Both the contents of and the parameters contained within these databases are updated frequently. Water level information, for instance, is updated at least semiannually and water quality information is updated monthly, when flows are present at the monitoring locations.
• Flow • Cyanazine • Disulfoton • EC • Simazine • Malathion • pH • Methamidophos • Methidathion • Temperature • DDE • Parathion, methyl • Dissolved Oxygen • DDT • Phorate • TDS • DDD • Phosmet • Turbidity • Dicofol • Glyphosate • Nitrate + Nitrate as N • Dieldrin • Paraquat • Orthophosphate-P • Endrin • Trifluralin • Ammonia-N • Aldicarb • TSS • Unionized Ammonia • Carbaryl • E. coli • TKN • Carbofuran • Fecal Coliform • Phosphorus • Diuron • Toxicity, minnow • Arsenic • Linuron • Toxicity, water flea • Boron • Methiocarb • Toxicity, algea • Cadmium • Methomyl • Hyalella Azteca • Copper • Oxyml • Grain Size • Lead • Azinphosmethyl • Bifenthrin • Nickel • Methoxychlor • Cyfluthrin • Selenium • Chlorpyrifos • Cypermethrin • Zinc • Demeton-S • Esfenvalerate • Molybdenum • Diazinon • Fenpropthrin • Hardness • Dichlorvos • Lamba cyhalothrin • Atrazine • Dimethoate • Permethrin
June 2018 J-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
J.4.1 Data Collection
Data is generated from a number of sources. Those sources include the DCTRA itself, the Tule River Association, the Friant Water Authority, the Tule Basin Water Quality Coalition and numerous state and federal agencies with whom the DCTRA and its member units have cooperative data sharing agreements. In addition, the DCTRA has an informational sharing arrangement with both the County of Kings and the County of Tulare with respect to information available in both of their ArcView databases and, to a certain extent, in their AutoCAD databases.
J.4.2 Database Maintenance
At the current time, with the governance of the IRWMP residing with DCTRA, DCTRA assumes the responsibility and lead role position of maintaining their database. Transition is occurring between the DCTRA with respect to the maintenance of the water quality database. As acceptance of the Tule Basin Water Quality Coalition by the Regional Water Quality Control Board has occurred, the water quality database maintenance is now by said Coalition. In addition, this database will be expanded from its current format of being the repository for surface water quality data and will expand to include groundwater quality data.
J.4.3 Data Sharing
In addition to responding to Public Records Act requests, the DCTRA routinely shares all of its information with parties, upon request. Numerous requests for water level information, water management information and project related performance measurements are satisfied, upon request.
J.4.4 Interface with State Database Systems
Data is currently automatically uploaded to State databases such as the California Environmental Resources Evaluation System (CERES), to CEDEN, the Water Data Library (WDL), CASGEM, of which the DCTRA is a signator participant and the California Environmental Information Catalog (CEIC). Water quality data is currently entered into the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program (GAMA) of the State Water Resources Control Board and into the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) of the same agency. DCTRA member units have long transmitted both spring and summer groundwater elevation readings to the State Department of Water Resources, with additional readings now being introduced on a separate basis into the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program (CASGEM).
J.4.5 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Measures
Quality assurance and quality control measures involve the proper collection of data in the field, and proper transfer of data as it is uploaded to electronic files and stored for future use. The data contained in the database is historical data that has been completed by industry groups, commodity groups, municipalities, and public utility districts within the Tule River Basin. The data has been collected and submitted at the level of quality required by regulatory agencies; therefor the data is considered to be
June 2018 J-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section J – Data Management
accurate and reliable. Additionally, DCTRA has developed data collection and inventory protocols and standards to increase consistency amongst users. These protocols are described below:
Protocols to Ensure Accuracy of Groundwater Level Data
• Perform all groundwater level measurements of the Plan wells in as short a time period as possible. • Perform semi-annual groundwater measurements at the same time of the year each year (February and October). • Document the measurement reference point for each well. • Document the date and time of each measurement. • Measure each well twice, or more if needed, until consistent results are obtained. • If there is reason to suspect groundwater contamination, water level measuring equipment should be decontaminated after the measurement. • Landowners will be contacted for permission to access their property for field measurement of their well(s).
General Protocols for the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program Include:
• Adequate well pumping time prior to sample collection with documentation of stabilized parameters. • Proper sample containers, preservatives, and holding time. • Secure chain-of-custody procedures. • Testing shall be performed by an accredited, state-certified laboratory that uses proper quality control and quality assurance procedures. • Samples shall be given a quality assurance code, which represents the relative confidence in the sample. • Certain tests shall include spiked, duplicate and field-blank samples for comparison to genuine samples. • Proper handling procedures. • Documentation of all protocols and procedures that are used. • Uniform time of year for sampling. • Document the name, contact information, and qualifications of the individual taking the sample. • Landowners will be contacted for permission to access their property and sample the groundwater pumped from their well.
Monitoring and reporting methods should be updated as better technology becomes available. This will ensure that the best available information is used when making water management decisions.
June 2018 J-8
Section K Financing Strategies
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section K – Financing Strategies
Section K – Financing Strategies
K.1 Introduction
2016 IRWM Program guidelines require financing to be considered for projects identified in an IRWM Plan. Under these guidelines, an IRWMP must include the following items related to financing:
• List known, as well as, possible funding sources, programs, and grant opportunities for the development and ongoing funding of the IRWM Plan. • List the funding mechanisms, including water enterprise funds, rate structures, and private financing options, for projects that implement the IRWM Plan. • An explanation of the certainty and longevity of known or potential funding for the IRWM Plan and projects that implement the Plan. • An explanation of how operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for projects that implement the IRWM Plan would be covered and the certainty of operation and maintenance funding.
This section will identify potential funding sources, assess the certainty and longevity of those funding sources, and provide and cost estimate for each of the IRWMP identified projects.
K.2 Program-Level Funding Sources
Implementation of the IRWM Plan relies upon RWMG members and stakeholders to provide in-kind support, financial support, and to obtain other revenue sources for the anticipated costs of plan implementation and ongoing activities of the RWMG. To date, the majority of funding activities directly related to the IRWMP have been born by the DCTRA. Organizational efforts and costs related to same associated with the Stakeholders Advisory Group have been at the call of KDWCD, with meetings being held at the office of said entity. All costs related to the preparation costs of this IRWMP have been funded by DCTRA with the use of the KDWCD IRWMP as the base document. The cost structure related to the IRWMP will be modified once the new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is adopted, in accordance with terms and conditions of the MOU.
There is often uncertainty when relying primarily on grant funding; therefore, it is crucial to look for other forms of long term funding to sustain IRWM planning efforts. The following sections describe local funding mechanisms/sources in the IRWM Planning area to support long-term IRWMP Implementation and meet maintenance and operations requirements.
K.2.1 In-Kind Support
Stakeholders that are not able to contribute financial resources may be able to contribute services or items that further regional IRWM planning. In-kind support can include stakeholder provided services, such as map-making, grant writing, preparing newsletters, and updating the IRWM website, or material
June 2018 K-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section K – Financing Strategies
contributions such as a venue for meetings or activities, use of a company vehicle, use of office supplies and/or equipment, and other appropriate forms of contribution. While managing in-kind support requires a high level of regional communication and the availability of in-kind support in the future is not certain, it furthers IRWMP implementation and provides a meaningful opportunity for small and/or disadvantaged entities to support IRWMP implementation.
K.2.2 Connect Stakeholder Grant Funding Opportunities to Tule River Basin IRWMP
This funding mechanism involves the inclusion of costs related RWMG administration into a project’s budget. When a project proponent pursues grant funding, the RWMG will encourage the proponent to include a budget line item that reflects the cost of RWMG administration and integration of the project outcomes into the Plan. Inclusion of administrative activities into the budgets for individual projects increases the certainty of RWMG funding and ultimately the longevity of IRWMP implementation.
K.2.3 Fee-For-Service
The RWMG could establish a fee structure for professional services related to project implementation, compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), grant writing and other administrative activities. This method could increase the certainty of RWMG funding by providing a consistent source of revenue from entities seeking technical or administrative assistance.
K.2.4 State and Federal Grants
The RWMG may apply for IRWM planning grants to fund updates to the plan. These updates may be needed as a result of new IRWM Grant program guidelines, changes in political and regulatory setting, or new technical information that is relevant to the region.
At present, solicitations are closed for both Proposition 84 and Proposition 1 IRWM Planning Grants. Although the future of these programs is uncertain, another round of funding may become available in the future.
K.3 Project-Level Funding Sources
Successful implementation of an IRWM Plan requires reliable funding for projects intended to meet IRWMP objectives. The RWMG has established a process for selecting projects for IRWM grant funding (see Section G – Project Solicitation and Prioritization). When an IRWM grant solicitation is announced by DWR, the RWMG will decide which projects to include in the grant application package on behalf of the Region since only a limited number of projects can be submitted in any one round. Project proponents will be responsible for developing individual applications in response to solicitations.
June 2018 K-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section K – Financing Strategies
K.3.1 Funding of Project Applications
Specific water management project funding is dealt with in a separate fashion from the IRWMP funding. Applicants for specific funding programs are required to fund their pro-rata share of the cost of development of project specifics and project funding applications. Each of the participants in these efforts, over recent history, have benefitted by cost sharing a number of common elements of applications which have been shared on an equal division basis. Specific agreements for obligation to cover such costs have been developed on a funding effort-by-funding effort basis with this arrangement anticipated to continue into the future. Requiring the project proponent to secure funding for project applications ensures the certainty and longevity of this funding source. The draft Tule Basin MOU includes a provision for establishing the special project agreement to address these separate cost share agreements.
K.3.2 Projects Funding
On a parallel with project application funding, funding of the local matching share of individual projects has been a responsibility of the project advocate. In several cases, projects for which application has been made have more than one beneficiary and, in such cases, a division of local share of costs occurs. The basis for this division of cost is founded in negotiations between the project advocates. DCTRA, as the initially designated fiscal agent, acts on behalf of the other Memorandum of Understanding participants and will require financial assurance procedures prior to submittal of a funding application. In this fashion, both DCTRA, as the applicant agency and the body to which participation application is being made, can have reasonable assurance that the project applicant has the financial capability to satisfy the local share of funding requirements, including those for project operations and maintenance activities. The dynamic between project proponents and incidental beneficiaries serves to increase the certainty and longevity of this funding source by encouraging cost sharing agreements. The specifics of these funding procedures will be revisited on an application-by-application basis into the future.
F.3.3 Grants and Loans (State and Federal)
Due to the high number of DAC’s in the IRWM Planning area, the region has a limited ability to raise local revenue for projects and programs related to regional water management. Although there is a significant degree of uncertainty in terms of the availability of state and federal funding opportunities, financing for these projects and programs is often reliant on State or Federal grant programs and loans.
The number and type of grant and loan programs available to public agencies and utilities in any given year can vary significantly based on whether the Legislature targets appropriations to the programs. Many of the grant programs below are on-going with rounds of grant monies provided upon availability of funding. The grant and loan programs listed below are not exhaustive and should be updated regularly as part of the Region’s IRWM Plan Implementation.
June 2018 K-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section K – Financing Strategies
Table K-1. State of California Funding Opportunities
Funding Source Funding Program 2018 Implementation Grant Disadvantaged Community Involvement Program CalConserve Water Use Efficiency Revolving Fund Loan Program Proposition 1 IRWM Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Grants Program Sustainable Groundwater Planning Grant Program Technical Assistance Funding Program Water Recycling Funding Program Flood Corridor Program FloodSAFE California Local Levee Assistance Program Proposition 84 Flood Emergency Response Projects Grants Program Urban Streams Restoration Program Storm Water Grant Program Proposition 50 Safe Drinking Water/Contaminant Removal Water-Energy Grant Program California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1988 Agricultural Drainage Loan Program Other State Funding Clean Water State Revolving Fund Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Drinking Water for Schools Grant Program Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program
Table K-2. Federal Funding Opportunities
Funding Source Funding Program Source Reduction Assistance EPA EPA Wetlands Program Development Grants Five Star Restoration Program United States Rural Development, Water and Waste Disposal Program Department of Resource Advisory Committees (RAC) Safe Rural Schools Agriculture (USDA) Funding US Bureau of WaterSMART Grant Program Reclamation US Fish and Wildlife North American Wetlands Conservation Act Grant Service National Rural Water NRWA Revolving Loan Fund Association Other Federal Funding Water Resources Development Act Other Federal Funding
June 2018 K-4
Section L Technical Analysis
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section L – Technical Analysis
Section L – Technical Analysis
L.1 Introduction
There have been numerous technical analyses and evaluations over time within the Tule River Basin that have been instrumental in shaping the direction, emphasis and priorities of water management activities of the DCTRA IRWM Plan. These studies have then contributed to the rationale of the DCTRA IRWMP objectives and their contribution to the Tule River Basin understanding from the perspective of science and management. The Stakeholder Advisory Group utilized this wealth of information in the establishment of objectives, in the decision of which water resource management strategies were incorporated into the DCTRA IRWMP and the evaluation method of projects that adequately address the DCTRA IRWMP needs.
This section provides a discussion of:
1. The technical information sources and/or data sets used to develop the water management needs. 2. Why this technical information is representative or adequate for developing the IRWM Plan
L.2 Technical Information Sources and Data Used
Although there have been numerous studies that have influenced development of the IRWMP, there are a few key efforts that should be emphasized by a summary of activities and contributions. Additionally, a table has been provided to list the variety of technical analyses that contributed to the IRWMP. (Each of the following technical analysis examples are noted throughout the IRWMP.)
L.2.1 The Water Resources Investigation (WRI)
This is an ongoing process that began with the formation of the DCTRA and continues to date. The investigation has been structured as a series of facilitated exercises, along with supplemental analyses, with the managers of the DCTRA member agencies. In general, the exercises have been structured around an analysis of assets and needs, water resources, specific for each member agency. The analysis exercises have been followed with resource/need matching exercises wherein the needs of one member agency are examined from the perspective of being satisfied with the assets of another member agency.
The matching exercises have then been expanded to a project development phase, where efforts have been undertaken to determine if single-purpose or joint projects could be developed to address resource deficiencies of both single entities, or better yet, multiple agencies. Coming out of this process, as an initial success, was a better understanding of individual and collective resources and needs. Over time, resource exchanges have been extended in some cases and created in others. Joint projects have been identified with some having been developed. The project list to be created and approved as a part of the IRWM development process will use this project list as its starting point. The process has also provided the Tule
June 2018 L-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section L – Technical Analysis
River Basin, public water agencies and overlying landowners and water users with a better understanding of the Tule River Basin by answering questions related to the quantity of groundwater, the quality trends related to groundwater, sources and volumes of recharge and trends in water levels in the Tule River Basin. The investigations have provided an improved base on which to examine Tule River Basin hydrological and hydrogeological conditions and will assist in future quantification its water supply capability, or safe yield and degree of groundwater overdraft. Additional member agency studies have been tiered off of these efforts and are leading to projects to allow for improved water management capabilities within the IRWMP.
L.2.2 Water Quality Portal
The Water Quality Portal (WQP) is a service sponsored by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC). Data for this region was provided to the Water Quality Portal by the California Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water. This report utilizes data obtained from this service to report hexavalent chromium levels and perchlorate levels within the IRWMP region.
Hexavalent chromium levels were recorded annually from 2013 to 2017 in 122 wells within the IRWM planning area. These values were averaged to provide a regional mean hexavalent chromium level for each year. A similar process was used to calculate regional perchlorate levels. Perchlorate concentrations were recorded annually from 2001 to 2017 in 179 wells within the IRWM planning area. These values were averaged to identify the regional mean annual perchlorate concentration. The average annual concentrations of these contaminants, as well as the highest concentration observed, are displayed in Section C – Region Description in Figures C-7 and C-8.
L.2.3 The Crop Water Use Model
The most recent of technical analysis resulting in useful information is the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) Crop Water Use Model initiated in 2011 by the KDWCD. A weak area in the use of the developed groundwater models has been the determination of crop water use and this valuable data has historically been estimated using sporadic crop data and previous study estimations in an equation to approximate the data. The NDVI Crop Water Use Model, performed by Davids Engineering, calculates evapotranspiration (ET) using reflective energy data from Landsat satellite imagery on a unit scale necessary to distinguish variations in vegetation types. This data is combined with simulation of irrigation events using a daily rootzone water balance model. The results are unique enough to correlate with agricultural usages as identified through available crop surveys. The crop water use model is expandable to the Tule River Basin through purchase of the appropriate panels of reflective energy data.
The modeling provides:
• Monthly cropping identification by crop type and acreage; • Regionalized crop coefficients of water demands for agriculture occurring within the Southern San Joaquin Valley; • Monthly crop water demands from years 1999 through 2009 and annually thereafter.
June 2018 L-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section L – Technical Analysis
L.2.4 Community Climate System Model 3.0 (CCSM3)
The CCSM3 is a climate model consisting of four separate models connected by a flux coupler that simultaneously simulate earth’s atmosphere, ocean, land surface, and sea ice to provide a realistic simulation of earth’s climate system. This model can then be used to make local climate change predictions. CCSM3 was used in this plan to project average annual high temperature and average annual precipitation within the Tule River Basin IRWMP planning area from the present date to 2100.
Like most climate models, CCSM3 divides the area of study into a grid, and the model performs calculations for each individual cell within the grid, which is then represented by a single value for temperature, precipitation, or other climate variable of interest. Nine cells, which cover the large majority of the IRWMP planning area, were used to predict future climate conditions. The individual values of each cell for average annual high temperature and average annual precipitation were averaged to provide a comprehensive view of the region’s predicted climate conditions by year.
L.2.5 Groundwater Management Plan
Responding to then recent Groundwater Legislation, in 1995 the DCTRA and participating local entities formally adopted the DCTRA’s Groundwater Management Plan (GMP). Th e GMP was updated in 2012. The GMP states, “The purpose of the Groundwater Management Plan (Plan) is to evaluate the monitoring data and information collected compared to the management goals and objectives. The continued efforts for the Plan are to document the existing groundwater management activities of the DCTRA and to formalize other actions that will be used in implementing a monitoring and management program for conjunctive use, replenishment and preservation of the quantity and quality of groundwater within the Basin for long term beneficial uses.” The GMP evaluates groundwater conditions and challenges, identifies solutions and establishes goals for the participating stakeholders to best manage this critical resource. Six elements currently shape the GMP:
1. Monitoring Program; 2. Resource Protection; 3. Sustainability; 4. Stakeholder Involvement; 5. Planning and Management; and 6. Information Dissemination
At the core of the GMP is the recognition that the conjunctive management of water supplies within the GMP area must be continued and that achieving hydrologic equilibrium requires the management of both surface and groundwater supplies. The GMP is a vital element of the DCTRA IRWMP as it is one of the strongest stakeholder efforts and with proven results within the Tule River Basin.
L.2.6 Water Management Plans
Based on Friant Division, CVP contract requirements member agencies holding a contract from the United State Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) for Central Valley Project (CVP) water from the Friant-Kern Canal, have developed Agricultural Water Management Plans (WMP) in concert with Reclamation. The objective of each WMP is to evaluate, identify, establish and describe best management practices that
June 2018 L-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section L – Technical Analysis
will result in efficient use and best conservation/ management of water by setting policy and practice of use of water related devices, equipment or facilities. These WMPs are reevaluated and updated every five (5) years in order to continually search for the best available cost-effective technology and best management practices to achieve the highest level of delivery water management. Each of these technical analyses were directly influential in the development of this IRWMP in that they informed the stakeholders with key aspects of the Tule River Basin and defined effective objectives and resource management strategies based on science, instead of speculation and influenced the emphasis of the project scoring procedures developed by the Stakeholder Advisory Group.
L.2.7 Population and Demographic Information
Population and Demographic Data was obtained from the United States Census Bureau website in April 2018 to develop an overview of social characteristics within the IRWM Region. The IRWM report utilized the United States Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, which are developed to more accurately represent smaller communities. Unlike the US Census, which is conducted every 10 years to provide an official count of the entire U.S. population, the ACS is conducted every year and provides up-to-date information about the social and economic needs within a community.
June 2018 L-4
Section M Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
Water and land use are inextricably linked. This section focuses on how the IRWM Plan relates to planning documents and programs established by local agencies. The IRWM Plan facilitates communication between land use planners and water managers to encourage coordination between land use planning and regional water planning. This collaborative management approach leads to better decision making, which in turn increases the region’s resiliency to climate change and drought and ensures that the region’s water needs are met into the future.
The planning documents discussed below serve as an important foundation for the IRWM plan. The goals, objectives, and programs contained in these documents are integrated into the IRWMP to ensure that it is consistent with local issues and needs. The RWMG will continue to integrate local planning objectives as General and Community Plans are updated or new plans are developed.
M.1 Applicable Land Use Plans
M.1.1 Tulare County General Plan
The County of Tulare has recently adopted an updated General Plan which has elements related to infrastructure development. The General Plan places a high priority on the provision of water supply to community areas, with specific emphasis on water supply for areas subject to development. In recognition of the significance of surface water supply to development within the county, reference is made to surface water supply related issues. The General Plan has a special section related to water supply based on the early recognition by the Board of Supervisors that water plays a critical role in the economic well-being of the County. It was the understanding of the Board of Supervisors that the authors of various components of the General Plan took into consideration the water supply information which was made available prior to the development of policy issues which are embodied in the adopted General Plan. It is the goal of the Board of Directors of the Deer Creek and Tule River Authority (DCTRA) to work with the County with respect to the issues of land use planning and land use actions as they relate, in particular, to water quality and, to a lesser extent, water quantity.
M.1.2 City of Porterville General Plan
The City of Porterville General Plan contains a variety of policies related to water management that are integrated into the IRWMP. These include the continued monitoring of water quality, incorporation of water recycling programs, and reduction in the over drafting of groundwater. It is the goal of the RWMG to work with the City of Porterville in order to facilitate an integrated approach to water and land use planning.
June 2018 M-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
M.1.3 Unincorporated Community Plans
Several unincorporated communities exist within the IRWMP area. The communities with formal community plans include:
Table M-1. Community Plans Within the IRWM Planning area.
Population Size Year Community Community (2010 Census) Plan was Approved Terra Bella 3,310 2015 Pixley 3,310 2015 Tipton 2,543 2015 Ducor 612 2015 Poplar 2,470 1998
The community plans vary in terms of their relevancy, for example the Poplar Community Plan has not been updated for almost 20 years, however much of the information in the plans remains highly relevant. The IRWMP incorporates several policies identified in these documents, including those related to flood control, reducing groundwater overdraft, increasing water use efficiency, and protecting local water resources. The RWMG will continue to work with communities within the region to encourage integrated decision making with regard to land use and water infrastructure projects.
M.1.4 National Forest Land Management Plan
While the DCTRA IRWMP has an easterly boundary that extends only up to approximately the 660 foot contour, actions which take place higher in the Tule River watershed have an impact on beneficial uses within the IRWMP planning area. In particular, sedimentation reduction is a major issue, particularly as it affects storage capability behind Success Dam. In addition, uncontrolled stream systems feeding into the IRWMP area are sensitive to and impacted by adverse volume sediment loads. The recharge capability of the Tule River and its distributaries and the uncontrolled stream system beds are the principal locations where effective recharge of runoff to the groundwater reservoir occurs. Accumulation of sediments in these channels is averse to the effective percolation capability of same.
In addition, coliform contamination is an objective water quality standard in both the Basin Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin and within the adopted General Order related to the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program. The actions of parties in their utilization of natural forest and park lands contributory to the stream groups is currently exhibiting an adverse level of coliform presence and the matter is rising on the radar of the Regional Water Quality Control Board as an issue to be dealt with. As preliminary indications are that the source of this contamination is not from irrigated agricultural, attention of the Regional Water Quality Control Board will be turned away from irrigated agricultural to other potential sources once they feel that sufficient justification exists of the source not being irrigated agricultural. Coordination with the National Forest Land Management Plan and with U.S. Forest Service personnel will obviously be required to address each of these and potentially additional, water quality related issues.
June 2018 M-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
M.2 Applicable Water Management Plans
M.2.1 Urban Water Management Plan
An Urban Water Management Plan is currently in place for the City of Porterville. The plan deals with existing and forecasted future conditions, particularly with regard to land use considerations. In response to projected demands, forecasts are made of future requirements for supply, with additional segments dealing with water quality related issues. In addition, due to declining water levels, both static and pumping, each of these plans deals with issues related to power required for extraction and the costs related to same. Additional considerations are given to water quality issues and historical and projected impacts on water quality parameters. Interface between elements of these plans and this IRWMP will obviously take place in the future and the guidance provided by the plan will be employed by those parties who are charged with dealing with the particular matter at hand. Within the DCTRA IRWM planning structure, including the Stakeholders Advisory Group, participation from each of the urban water suppliers already exists and attendance is regular for each of the representatives. Adequate knowledge sharing as to elements of each of the urban plans between both IRWMP planning areas will be of necessity moving forward with the formal adoption of this IRWMP.
M.2.2 DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan
The DCTRA has in place, an SB1938 compliant Groundwater Management Plan. This plan was prepared pursuant to the statutes related to implementing AB 3030 and has been updated bringing the plan SB1938 compliant. There are a multiple number of signatories to the DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan, including parties outside of DCTRA membership.
Based on the party’s signature to the DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan Memorandum of Understanding, the jurisdiction of said Groundwater Management Plan extends beyond the boundaries of DCTRA. In fact, based on the Memorandum of Understanding participants, the area covered by said plan extends beyond the boundary of the IRWMP, particularly to the west. To date, steps taken to update the policy provisions of the DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan has taken into consideration IRWM principals and it is anticipated that that degree of cooperation and coordination remain in the future.
M.2.3 Local Water Shortage Contingency Plans
At the current time, there is a single identified water shortage contingency plan in place within the DCTRA IRWM planning area. This plan is in the form of a written agreement between the Lower Tule River Irrigation District (LTRID) and the Terra Bella Irrigation District (TBID). Principal features of this plan call for entitlement to Friant Division, CVP supplies of TBID to be made available to LTRID when the demands of TBID have been met, in any given year. In a reciprocal fashion, in below-normal and dry year conditions, the LTRID available declared Friant Division, CVP supplies are first dedicated to TBID to meet their in-lieu domestic, domestic and agricultural demands. Supplies above that level are available to LTRID to use at their direction. While there are other informal water shortage contingency plans, there are no others that exist in written form that apply on a long-term basis. To the degree that such plans may be developed in the future, policies such as those of the Tule River Association relative to out-of-basin transfers will need to be taken into consideration as they are principally focused on water balance conditions within the Tule
June 2018 M-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
River Basin. Likewise, any future negotiations related to water banking where such banking will call for exportation of water from the Tule River Basin will need to take into account existing adopted policies with respect to out-of-basin transfers.
M.2.4 Capital Improvement Plans/Master Plans
For many of the public agencies and California Public Utility Commission governed utilities, capital improvement plans and/or master plans are in place. Many of the public district surface water suppliers also have in place either complete or equipment and distribution system oriented capital expenditure plans.
Based on the requirements of the implementing legislation of Proposition 218 and multiple court related decisions based on litigation surrounding compliance with the legislation implementing Proposition 218, future water management planning will need to take into consideration the economic constraints imposed by existing adopted elements of budgets, improvement plans and/or master plans. Water supply and water supply infrastructure projects developed as a result of the IRWMP process and participation have already had to take into account financial constraints imposed by both economic conditions within the IRWM planning area, as well as the constraints imposed by the implementing legislation associated with Proposition 218. This will continue to be of necessary concern in future planning efforts.
San Joaquin River Restoration
An important element of San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement legislation and the underpinning Settlement Agreement, calls for funding and project assistance and priority for restoring back to the Friant Division, CVP contractors that element of water supply estimated to be taken from their declared basis by virtue of Settlement. Based on the position of the number of Friant Division, CVP contractors within and adjacent to the IRWM boundary, attention to and participation in San Joaquin River Restoration activities will be paramount, particularly those dealing with water supply restoration.
M.2.5 Water Management and Monitoring Programs
The IRWMP project evaluation and scoring criteria take into account compliance with elements of adopted water management and monitoring programs in their evaluation and scoring processes. Outlined as follows are several topics related to water management and monitoring which are incorporated in this evaluation and scoring process. Updates to this IRWMP will need to consider the addition and/or deletion of programs from this inventory.
Groundwater Measurement Programs
The DCTRA, throughout its history, as well as Friant Division, CVP contractors have historically engaged in a process of groundwater level measurements which occurs in both the spring and fall months of each year. Data from these measurements is fed to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation who published documents up to 1992 with said information. The information is also supplied to the State Department of Water Resources (DWR) who historically published maps of both confined and unconfined lines of equal
June 2018 M-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
elevation on both a spring and fall basis. That mapping procedure has now been reduced by DWR to publication in the spring only of the unconfined lines of equal elevation of water in wells.
Complimentary to these programs, both the Tule River Basin urban and rural domestic water purveyors also conduct depth to groundwater measurement procedures. While driven principally by the economic factors of power consumption and capability of current pumping equipment to satisfactorily perform within the observed groundwater conditions, the information is nonetheless available in the public arena and can be utilized for project planning and impact analysis purposes. Based on the importance of this information to IRWM based water planning, it is envisioned that these efforts by local agencies will continue into the future and be available as a planning tool to IRWMP participants and the associated Stakeholders Advisory Group.
Water Quality Monitoring Programs
As previously introduced, a considerable program, both in terms of scope and cost exist with respect to surface water quality. An extensive inventory of surface water quality test results associated with agricultural delivery systems exists and is database accessible, both at the local, as well as at the State level. With the expansion of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program into groundwater, it will not be long until an expanded amount of information is available with respect to groundwater quality which, at the current time, is restricted principally to the domestic water purveyors’ service areas and the Dairy Order Monitoring Program. While this information is available through the databases of the Division of Drinking Water of the SWRCB and the RWQCB and published by each water purveyor and transmitted annually to their customers, the same level of quality information does not exist in the rural unincorporated areas not covered by a permitted domestic water supplier. Deliverables which are in the near-term, time wise, are required as a part of the newly adopted General Order under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program with respect to groundwater. As time passes, additional information will be available through this monitoring program to be utilized as another tool in the IRWM planning process.
Stormwater Resource Plans
Water Code § 10562 (b)(7) (i.e. SB 985) establishes new standards for stormwater resource plans and requires that they be incorporated into IRWM Plans as they are developed. A number of stormwater management programs exist within the IRWMP area, however these plans have not yet been updated to the standards set forth by this new legislation. It is important that a process is established by the IRWMP to incorporate new stormwater resource plans as they are developed.
The RWMG intends to review and update the IRWMP every five years as new information becomes available and conditions within the basin change. New or updated stormwater resource plans should be incorporated into the IRWMP at this time. The processes required to amend the IRWMP as new stormwater resource plans are developed is located in Section B – Governance, Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach.
June 2018 M-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section M – Relation to Local Water and Land Use Planning
M.3 Local Climate Change Planning
M.3.1 Tulare County Climate Action Plan
The Tulare County Climate Action Plan is the only formal climate change planning document in the IRWM planning area and establishes emission reduction goals consistent with the goals of AB 32. The document also develops a set of strategies to implement these goals, which are organized as follows:
• Land Use and Transportation System Improvements • Alternative, Non-Automotive Travel Modes • Building Energy Efficiency/Green Building Design • Water Conservation • Waste Reduction Program
The water conservation strategies identified in the Tulare County Climate Action Plan are the most relevant in terms of coordination with this IRWM plan. Water conservation reduces GHG emissions by reducing the energy required to pump and treat water for use, while also increasing adaptability to climate change caused changes in precipitation and water availability. The specific water conservation measures identified in the Tulare County Climate Action Plan are consistent with IRWMP objectives in Section E, as well as the Resource Management Strategies in Section F, and are briefly summarized below.
• Expand groundwater recharge to capture runoff and water available during wet years • Use reclaimed water from tertiary plants for irrigation in appropriate locations • Use native and drought tolerant landscaping • Require the installation of low-flow fixtures • Smart irrigation technologies that apply water based on plant requirements and that direct water flow only where needed.
M.3.2 Climate Change Adaption and Mitigation Strategies in Local Land Use Plans
Several Community Plans within the IRWMP area include policies related to climate change. These policies are primarily related to climate change mitigation and involve strategies to reduce GHG emissions through the consideration of GHG emissions during the project review process to meet statewide objectives. The Tule River Basin IRWMP facilitates this strategy by requiring consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions prior to the development of water infrastructure projects. This process is described in Section O – Climate Change. Climate change adaption strategies were not included in the Porterville General Plan or Community Plans within the IRWMP area.
It is likely that climate change mitigation and adaption policies will be strengthened as time goes on. These strategies will be incorporated into the IRWMP as they are adopted by communities within the IRWMP area. The process by which the RWMG will amend the IRWMP is in Section B – Governance, Stakeholder Involvement, and Outreach.
June 2018 M-6
Section N Planning Coordination
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section N – Planning Coordination
Section N – Planning Coordination
N.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to ensure an appropriate level of coordination with local, State, and federal agencies and stakeholders to minimize conflicts and to optimize water resource utilization. It is the responsibility of the RWMG to coordinate efforts with these entities. This section identifies public agencies representing the IRWM region, and discusses their role in water management within the Region. The end of the section contains existing agreements and coordination efforts taking place on a Water Planning Area level.
N.2 Coordinate Water Management Activities to Avoid Conflict
This section discusses and recognizes entities within the region that have a stake or role in water resources management/issues. The following (not listed in any order of importance) is a list of the more visible water resources related agencies and stakeholders:
• California Water Service Company • Santa Rosa Tachi Tribe • City of Porterville • Tule River Tribe • Community Water Center • Sequoia Rivers Land Trust • County of Tulare • Self-Help Enterprises • DCTRA / Tule River Association • Tipton CSD • Department of Fish and Wildlife • Pixley PUD • Department of Water Resources • Woodville PUD • Keller/Wegley Engineering • Poplar CSD • Provost & Pritchard Engineering Group • Alpaugh CSD • R.L. Schafer & Associates • Tulare Basin Wildlife Partners • 4Creeks, Inc. • Regional Water Quality Control Board
It is important to understand their influence and involvement on water resources management efforts within the County, and that they have either contributed to the development of this IRWM Plan, or should be coordinated with in future efforts to better understand the conditions in different water planning areas and the benefits and impacts of proposed water management strategies.
The RWMG works toward bringing interested agencies and stakeholders to the project implementation process at an early stage when their involvement is beneficial and educational for both sides. Additionally, efforts under the purview of the IRWM Plan need to be able to show a direct benefit to the IRWM Plan’s Goals and Objectives, and ultimately meet one or more of the Water Management Strategies used in this plan to measure and report success. Depending on the level of engagement with an agency, the outcome is to be recorded for reporting in the IRWM Plan Monitoring and Performance Report.
June 2018 N-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section N – Planning Coordination
N.3 Pre-Project Coordination Efforts
Prior to project implementation, significant outreach efforts occur to encourage coordination between stakeholders. This effort serves to minimize conflict and optimize project outcome.
N.3.1 Outreach to Neighboring Regions
The IRWMP boundary abuts that of the Southern Sierra IRWM to the east, the Kaweah Basin IRWM to the North, and the Poso Creek IRWM to the South. A considerable degree of cooperation exists between the IRWM groups and it is anticipated that the entities will conduct joint project evaluations to determine if a strengthening of projects could occur as a result of simply evaluating the nature of particular projects and their particular advantages and disadvantages. It is a goal of the Board of Directors of DCTRA to continue this coordination, which is partially based on the recognition that water deliveries into the DCTRA have a common source basis of the Tule River.
N.3.2 Outreach to Disadvantaged Communities
Based on the decision to adopt a common Stakeholders Advisory Committee, programs specifically designed to address water quality issues related to disadvantaged communities and aggregation of single- family residences in a disadvantaged hamlet setting are raised to a new level. Recognition exists that a different outreach methodology will need to be generated, at least as to the efforts of the IRWMP, relative to the outreach mechanisms to other than surface water related entities.
Mapping has been completed of each of the concentrations of households within the IRWMP boundary in excess of six single-family units. From this basis, work could begin with respect to the drinking water quality of each of those areas, followed by the development of a program for assistance to the identified areas. In some cases, this outreach could be oriented toward development of a water distribution system and the extension of an adjacent water purveyor, meeting current state and federal drinking water standards, as the methodology to supply the now non-compliant area with an adequate drinking water supply. In other areas, where consolidation is not an option, pursuit of a step-by-step process as was outlined in Chapter 9, could be undertaken by DCTRA. Throughout this process, an outreach to the effected homeowners and to representatives of environmental justice concerns would need to be made in order to ensure that all possible steps are taken to remedy the drinking water quantity/quality deficiency. While the IRWMP process adequately addresses the intent to incorporate stakeholders and potential beneficiaries in the service areas into the process, more specific work needs to be undertaken to address the project development phase and, more importantly, the government’s development steps which are associated with generating solutions to rural drinking water related problems.
N.3.3 Outreach to Native American Tribal Communities
The DCTRA and the Tule River Association have a longstanding relationship with tribal community representatives in the area. Pre-project coordination with tribal community representatives ensures the
June 2018 N-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section N – Planning Coordination
protection of cultural resources critical to Native Americans. Consultations take place on any project which is in the development process or, more importantly, at the threshold of the construction process, to promote coordination with tribal group representatives and to ensure protection of antiquities, sacred sites and burial sites.
N.4 Activity Coordination with Adjacent Regions
N.4.1 Coordination with Tulare Basin JPA Development
Based on a regional stakeholders meeting called by DWR and held at the office of the Semitropic Water Storage District, significant effort was put into the formation of a regional Joint Powers Authority. Meetings were initiated and have been held on a monthly basis since. These meetings are currently being held on the first Monday of each month in the offices of Provost & Pritchard Engineering Group in Visalia. Stakeholders from the region continue to attend with participation from the Kings River Basin, Kern County IRWM groups including the Poso IRWM, the Kaweah River Basin, the Tule River Basin and the Southern Sierra IRWM. There has been periodic attendance from parties considering formation of an organization covering the Tulare Lake bed area.
The initial efforts to form were pursued to the extent of developing a formal Joint Powers Authority with an outline for development of that Authority being developed and agreed to by the participants. A copy of that outline is presented in Appendix C. This effort culminated in the preparation of a Joint Powers Agreement which was specific to Tulare Lake hydrologic region water-related entities. The initial formal parties to this agreement included the KDWCD, the Kings River Conservation District and the Semitropic Water Storage District. A copy of the subject JPA Outline is included in Appendix C.
Several parties having input to the participants to this proposed JPA have weighed the value of this broader regional effort and how it might improve, or reduce opportunities in the project evaluation process and whether it might pit one region within the JPA area against another. Formal action has been taken by some participants to memorialize this position, while still providing instruction to participate in regional JPA related activities. Movement beyond the ad-hoc level which currently exists will probably be dependent, to a significant degree, on state-wide related funding activities, principal of which are those administered by the State Department of Water Resources.
N.5 Coordination with State and Federal Agencies
State and federal agencies have an important regulatory responsibility to the people of the state and country, respectively. Two of the more visible agencies and their responsibilities – the State Department of Water Resources and the State Water Resources Control Board – are summarized below.
June 2018 N-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section N – Planning Coordination
N.5.1 Water Resource Management of Two Primary State Agencies
California Department of Water Resources
The State DWR mission statement is “To manage the water resources of California in cooperation with other agencies, to benefit the State’s people, and to protect, restore, and enhance the natural and human environments.” DWR programs and roles include:
• Development and implementation of the California Water Plan • Grant program administration • Conservation and urban water management planning regulation • Groundwater basin and watershed planning/management • State Water Project ownership and operation
California Water Resources Control Board
The State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) mission is to preserve, enhance and restore the quality of California’s water resources, and ensure their proper allocation and efficient use for the benefit of present and future generations. Regional Water Boards operating under the SWRCB manage water quality through the regulation a variety of water management practices. Specifically, Regional Water Boards regulate wastewater discharges from human activities that could result in degraded water quality. Their programs also address water rights, grant program administration, and guidance to assist with these efforts. From the State Board web site; programs offered by the State and Regional Board include:
• Biosolids • Dredge/fill (401) wetlands • Irrigated lands • Land disposal (landfills, waste piles) • Waste discharge requirements (non-Subchapter 15) • NPDES Surface Water • Recycled water • Sanitary sewer overflows • Stormwater • Timber harvest activities
Coordination with Other State and Federal Agencies
Parties associated with the DCTRA IRWMP are in a continuous mode of coordination with other state and federal agencies as well. Coordination with the U.S Army Corps of Engineers occurs on an almost-daily basis with regard to Lake Success, Success Dam, and flood control. The Central Valley Flood Protection Board also coordinates with stakeholders regularly on storm water control and flood protection projects. Stakeholders coordinate with the Bureau of Reclamation on a series of projects related to the Central Valley Project. Virtually no element of water management within the Tule River Basin takes place without the involvement of representatives from these agencies.
June 2018 N-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section N – Planning Coordination
N.6 Water Service Cooperative Agreement and Other Coordination Efforts
There are a significant number of relationships and agreements contribute to the IRWM structure. This section discusses the various cooperative agreements related to water management throughout the IRWM region. These are grouped by jurisdiction/interest area in the table below:
Table N-1. Cooperative relationships and agreements that contribute to the IRWM planning process and structure.
Jurisdiction Cooperative Agreement • Tule River Association Organization Agreement • Friant Water Authority JPA • State Water Project Water Users JPA • Tule River Improvement JPA • TBID/DCTRA Land Use Agreement • TBID/LTRID Water Exchange Agreement • TBID/SID/LTRID Resources Exchange Agreement • LTRID/City of Orange Cove Agreement Surface Water • LTRID/J.G. Boswell Co. Agreement • LTRID/Pioneer Water Company Agreement • County of Fresno/LTRID • Pixley ID/LTRID/Angiola WD Cooperative Agreement for Groundwater • LTRID/Vandalia ID Exchange Agreement • USBR Water Management Plans • AB 3616 Water Management Plans • Success Reservoir Storage Agreement • DCTRA GWMP • Tulare Lake Basin Coordinated GWMP • City of Porterville Urban Water Conservation Plan • City of Porterville Development Impact Policy Groundwater • County of Tulare General Plan • Groundwater Model Elements • Master Basin Model
• County of Tulare Agreements and Facilities • City of Porterville Agreements and Facilities • County of Tulare and LTRID Agreements and Facilities Stormwater • Tulare County Flood Control District and LTRID • Tulare County License for Pumping with USBR • LTRID 404 Permit • LTRID 1601 Permit • Tule Sub-watershed Water Quality Coalition Water Quality • Southern San Joaquin Valley Water Quality Coalition
June 2018 N-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section N – Planning Coordination
Jurisdiction Cooperative Agreement • City of Porterville WDRs • Strathmore P.U.D. WDRs • Terra Bella Sewer Maintenance District WDRs • Woodville P.U.D. WDRs/NPDES • Poplar C.S.D. WDRs • Tipton C.S.D. WDRs • Pixley P.U.D. WDRs • Woodville Farm Labor Camp WDRs • County of Tulare Abandoned Well Program Weather Information • DCTRA CIMIS Station Agreement Endangered Species • Sierra-Los Tulares Land Trust Projects (Sequoia Riverlands Trust) Recovery/Protection • DCTRA Recharge Ponds Site • Surface Water · Multiple Water Management Agency Boards of Directors · Multiple Water Management Agency Advisory Committees · Multiple Water Management Agency Technical Committees · Interbasin Water Management Coordinating Groups Kings-Tule Kaweah-Tule Tule-Tulare Lake Governance • Groundwater · GWMP Stakeholder Committees · DCTRA/City of Porterville Coordination Committee · Groundwater Model Technical Committee • Water Quality · Steering Committee · Technical Committee · Legal Committee ·
June 2018 N-6
Section O Climate Change
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
Section O - Climate Change
O.1 Introduction
The act of planning, by nature, requires an estimation of future conditions. Unlike other types of resource planning, which use historical measurements to estimate future conditions, climate change planning requires the use of computer simulations to predict future climate conditions. These predictions are then used to shape the development of projects and programs to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Per Proposition 84 and California Department of Water Resources (DWR) requirements, this chapter considers the ways in which climate change may impact the Tule River Basin IRWMP area.
This section begins with a brief description of the relationship between greenhouse gasses and climate change, an account of climate change trends, both globally and within the IRWMP area, and an analysis of the region’s vulnerabilities related to these trends via a climate change vulnerability assessment. The section concludes with a prioritized list of vulnerabilities in the planning area and a description of how climate change adaption and mitigation measures are integrated into the plan’s resource management strategies and project selection process.
O.2 Greenhouse Gasses and Climate Change
Natural processes and human activities emit greenhouse gases. The presence of GHGs in the atmosphere affects the earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat-trapping effect of GHGs, the earth’s surface would be about 34ºC cooler. However, it is believed that emissions from human activities, such as electricity production and vehicle use, have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of naturally occurring concentrations.
The effect of greenhouse gasses on earth’s temperature is equivalent to the way a greenhouse retains heat. Common GHGs include water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, chlorofluorocarbons, hydro chlorofluorocarbons, and hydro fluorocarbons, per fluorocarbons, sulfur and hexafluoride. Some gases are more effective than others. The Global Warming Potential (GWP) has been calculated for each greenhouse gas to reflect how long it remains in the atmosphere, on average, and how strongly it absorbs energy. Gases with a higher GWP absorb more energy, per pound, than gases with a lower GWP, and thus contribute more to global warming. For example, one pound of methane is equivalent to twenty-one pounds of carbon dioxide.
GHGs as defined by AB 32 include the following gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. GHGs as defined by AB 32 and sources are summarized in Table O-1.
June 2018 O-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
Table O-1. Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse Description and Physical Lifetime GWP Sources Gas Properties Emitted during the production and transport of coal, natural gas, Is a flammable gas and is and oil. Methane emissions also Methane the main component of 12 years 21 result from livestock and other (CH4) natural gas agricultural practices and by the
decay of organic waste in municipal solid waste landfills. Enters the atmosphere through burning fossil fuels (coal, natural gas and oil), solid waste, trees and wood products, and also as a An odorless, colorless, 30-95 result of certain chemical Carbon 1 natural greenhouse gas. years reactions (e.g., manufacture of dioxide (CO2) cement). Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere (or "sequestered") when it is absorbed by plants as part of the biological carbon cycle. Gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane with Were synthesized in 1928 for use chlorine and/or fluorine 55-140 3,800 to as refrigerants, aerosol Chloro- atoms. They are non- years 8,100 propellants, and cleaning solvents. fluorocarbons toxic nonflammable, They destroy stratospheric ozone. insoluble and chemically
unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the earth’s surface). Powerful greenhouse gases that A man-made greenhouse are emitted from a variety of gas. It was developed to industrial processes. Fluorinated replace ozone-depleting gases are sometimes used as gases found in a variety 140 to Hydro- 14 years substitutes for stratospheric of appliances. Composed 11,700 fluorocarbons ozone-depleting substances. of a group of greenhouse These gases are typically emitted gases containing carbon, in smaller quantities, but because chlorine an at least one they are potent greenhouse hydrogen atom. gases.
June 2018 O-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
Greenhouse Description and Physical Lifetime GWP Sources Gas Properties Commonly known as laughing gas, is a chemical compound with the formula N2O. It is an Emitted during agricultural and oxide of nitrogen. At 120 industrial activities, as well as Nitrous oxide room temperature, it is a 310 years during combustion of fossil fuels (N2O) colorless, non-flammable and solid waste. gas, with a slightly sweet
odor and taste. It is used in surgery and dentistry for its anesthetic and analgesic effects. Has a stable molecular Two main sources of pre- structure and only 50,000 6,500 to fluorocarbons are primary Pre- breaks down by years 9,200 aluminum production and fluorocarbons ultraviolet rays about 60 semiconductor manufacturing. kilometers above Earth’s
surface. This gas is manmade and used for An inorganic, odorless, insulation in electric power 3,200 Sulfur colorless, and nontoxic 23,900 transmission equipment, in the years hexafluoride nonflammable gas. magnesium industry, in
semiconductor manufacturing and as a tracer gas.
Each gas's effect on climate change depends on three main factors. The first being the quantity of these gases are in the atmosphere, followed by how long they stay in the atmosphere and finally how strongly they impact global temperatures.
In regards to the quantity of these gases are in the atmosphere, we first must establish the amount of particular gas in the air, known as Concentration, or abundance, which are measured in parts per million, parts per billion and even parts per trillion. To put these measurement in more relatable terms, one part per million is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into about 13 gallons of water, roughly a full tank of gas in a compact car. Therefore, it can be assumed larger emission of greenhouse gases lead to a higher concentration in the atmosphere.
Each of the designated gases described above can reside in the atmosphere for different amounts of time, ranging from a few years to thousands of years. All of these gases remain in the atmosphere long enough to become well mixed, meaning that the amount that is measured in the atmosphere is roughly the same all over the world regardless of the source of the emission.
June 2018 O-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.2.1 Regulatory Setting
Climate changes is a global, national, state and local issue involving greenhouse gas emissions from all around the world; therefore, countries around the world, including the United States, have established regulations to assist in the emissions of GHGs. Tables O-2, O-3, O-4, and O-5 gives a brief explanation of both international, national, state and regional regulations.
Table O-2. International Greenhouse Gas Regulations
Regulation Adopted Protocol The United Nations and the World Meteorological Organization Intergovernmental established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to assess the 1998 Panel on Climate scientific, technical and socio-economical information relevant to
Change understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change and its potential impacts.
United Nations Governments gather and share information on GHG emissions, national Framework Convention March 21, 1994 polices and best practices; launch national strategies for addressing GHG on Climate Change emissions and adapting to expected impacts.
Adopted: December Sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European 1, 1997 Kyoto Protocol community for reducing GHG emissions at an average of 5% against 1990 Entered into Force: levels over the five-year period of 2008-2012 February 16, 2005
The Paris Climate Agreement an agreement within the United UNFCCC to Adopted: December limit global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius above pre industrial Paris Climate 12, 2015 levels. Under the agreement, each country determines, plans, and Agreement Entered into Force: regularly reports its own contribution to mitigate global warming. The November 4 2016 agreement is voluntary and is not legally binding.
Table O-3. Federal Greenhouse Gas Regulations
Regulation Adopted Protocol The EPA Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding GHG emissions under section 2029(a) of the Clean Air Act. 1. Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases — carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), Greenhouse Gas December 7, 2009 hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur Endangerment hexafluoride (SF6) 2. Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare. An agreement between thirteen large automakers (accounting for 90% of Adopted: 1975 Corporate Average all vehicles sold in the United States), the United Auto Workers, and the Revised: July 29, Fuel Economy (CAFE) State of California to increase fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon for 2011 cars and light-duty trucks by model year 2025.
June 2018 O-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
Regulation Adopted Protocol Requires reporting of GHG emissions from large sources and suppliers in Greenhouse Gas September 22, 2009 the United States. Any facility that emits 25,000 metric tons or more per Reporting Program year of GHG emissions are required to submit annual reports to the EPA. Tailors the requirements of the Clean Air Act permitting programs to limit New Source Review May 13, 2013 which facilities will be required to obtain Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V permits. Standards of The EPA proposed new performance standards for emissions of carbon Performance for GHG dioxide for new affected fossil fuel-fired electrical utility generated units. Emissions for New New sources greater than 25 megawatt would be required to meet an March 27, 2012 Stationary Sources: output-based standard of 1,000 pound of carbon dioxide per megawatt- Electrical Utility hour, based on the performance of widely used natural gas combined Generating Units cycle technology Jurisdictions have developed a comprehensive initiative to reduce Western Climate Yet to be formally regional GHG emissions to 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. The Initiative Partner adopted partners are California, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec. Its cap and trade program is estimated to be fully implemented by 2012
Table O-4. State Greenhouse Gas Regulations
Regulation Adopted Protocol Adopted: 1978 California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Non-Residential 2008 Standards Buildings. Their standards are updated periodically to allow consideration Title 24 Effective: January and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and 1, 2010 methods
California Green A comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, January 12, 2010 Building Standards commercial and K-14 school buildings.
Reduce GHG emissions in new passenger vehicles from 2009 through 2016. These amendments are part of California’s commitment toward a nation- Pavley Regulations, AB wide program to reduce new passenger vehicle GHGs from 2012 through July 22, 2002 1493 2016. ARB’s September amendments will cement California’s enforcement of the Pavley rule starting in 2009 while providing vehicle manufacturers with new compliance flexibility.
Calls for a reduction of at least 10 percent in the carbon intensity of Low Carbon Fuel California's transportation fuels by 2020. It instructed the California Standard-Executive January 18, 2007 Environmental Protection Agency to develop and propose a draft Order S-01-07 compliance schedule to meet the 2020 target.
The law limits long-term investments in base load generation by the state's SB 1368 2006 utilities to power plants that meet an emissions performance standard (EPS)..
February 16, The Natural Resources Agency adopted Amendments to the CEQA SB 97 2010 Guidelines for greenhouse gas emissions.
Set the 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal into law. It directed the California Air Resources Board to begin developing discrete early actions AB 32 2006 to reduce greenhouse gases while also preparing a scoping plan to identify how best to reach the 2020 limit. The reduction measures to meet the 2020 target are to be adopted by the start of 2011.
Enhances California's ability to reach its AB 32 goals by promoting good SB 375 August 30, 2008 planning with the goal of more sustainable communities. Sustainable
June 2018 O-5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
Regulation Adopted Protocol Communities requires ARB to develop regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for passenger vehicles. ARB is to establish targets for 2020 and 2035 for each region covered by one of the State's 18 metropolitan planning organizations
A comprehensive “Climate Adaptation Strategy” that would identify the state’s vulnerabilities and plan accordingly. State agencies will take this report into account, due in December 2010, when planning new Executive Order S-13- 2009 infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and water treatment facilities. The 08 executive order noted that the country’s longest continuously operating sea level gauge, San Francisco Bay’s Fort Point, recorded a seven-inch rise in sea level over the 20th century.
Requires California to generate 20% of its electricity from renewable energy SB 1078, SB 107 and September 12, by 2017. SB 107 then changes the 2017 deadline ot 2010. Executive Order S- Executive Order S-14- 2002 14-08 required that all retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their 08 load with renewable energy by 2020.
Adopted: April These Thresholds are designed to establish the level at which the District CEQA Guidelines 13, 2009 believed air pollution emissions would cause significant environmental Update Updated: May impacts under CEQA and were posted on the Air District’s website and 2011 included in the Air District's updated CEQA Guidelines
Executive Order B-30- Establishes a California GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 April 20, 2015 15 levels by 2030.
AB 398 July 17, 2017 Extended the California Cap and Trade program through 2030.
Table O-5. Regional Greenhouse Gas Regulations
Regulation Adopted Protocol The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District is made up of eight San Joaquin Valley Air counties in California’s Central Valley: San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Pollution Control Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and Kern. The Valley Air District is governed by
District a Governing Board consisting of representatives from the Board of Supervisors of all eight counties, one Health and Science member, one Physician, and five Valley city representatives.
Tulare County Climate The Tulare County Climate Action Plan lays out a strategy, including specific Action Plan August 2012 policy recommendations that a state will use to address climate change and reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.
SJVAPCD CEQA The SJVAPCD approach is intended to streamline the process of determining Greenhouse Gas if project specific GHG emissions would have a significant effect. Best
Guidance Performance Standards would be established according to performance- based determinations.
San Joaquin Valley Intended to quantify, verify, and track voluntary GHG emissions reductions November 2008 Carbon Exchange generated within the San Joaquin Valley
Emission Reduction Credit Banking. Provided an administrative mechanism for sources to bank GHG emissions, mechanism for sources to transfer GHG Rule 2301 January 19, 2012 reductions to other users and defines eligibility standards, quantitative and procedures.
June 2018 O-6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.3 Climate Change Trends
There is a consensus within the scientific community that climate change is real, man-made, and already causing changes to earth’s temperature and precipitation patterns. These changes have directly lead to the increased ocean temperatures, decreased amounts of snow and ice, and rising sea levels. The indirect effects of climate change are numerous and vary depending on the region.
Climate models, primarily based on GHG emission rates, are used to predict the rate of climate change. The state of California provides the Cal-Adapt data portal which provides localized climate projections for a range of variables under different climate change scenarios. The data used in Cal-Adapt tools represents the most current climate data available.
The planning team used Cal-Adapt’s Community Climate System Model 3.0 (CCSM3) to identify climate projections for the planning area under high and low emissions scenarios. The CCM33 model is a climate model consisting of four separate models that simultaneously simulate earth’s atmosphere, ocean, land surface, and sea ice to simulate earth’s climate system. The planning team used the CCSM3 to predict the mean annual high temperature and average annual precipitation within the Tule River Basin from the present date to 2100.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has developed a set of possible future GHG emissions based on various scenarios for future global population growth, economic growth, and governmental regulations of GHG’s. Cal-Adapt projections are available for the following two IPCC scenarios:
• A2 is the medium-high emissions scenario. The A2 emissions scenario assumes continuous population growth and uneven economic and technological growth. It also assumes that heat- trapping emissions increase through the 21st century and that atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration approximately triples, relative to preindustrial levels, by 2100.
• B1 is the lower emissions scenario. B1 emissions scenario assumes a world with high economic growth and a global population that peaks by mid-century and then declines. Under this scenario, there is a rapid shift toward less fossil fuel-intensive industries and the introduction of clean and resource-efficient technologies. Heat-trapping emissions peak about mid-century and then decline; CO2 concentration approximately doubles, relative to preindustrial levels, by 2100.
The planning team reviewed projected temperature and precipitation changes in the IRWMP planning area through the 21st century. The figures below show the outputs for mean annual high temperature (Figure O-1) and average annual precipitation (Figure O-2) per decade. Temperature is expected to increase over the next century under both scenarios. Under the more extreme A2 scenario, the models show that temperature in the IRWMP planning area is expected to increase on average by 0.96 degrees per decade between 2000 and 2100. These averages limit outlying temperature abnormalities such as extreme heat and heat waves, which are also expected to increase as a result of climate change. Additionally, climate change is expected to increase minimum temperatures, which would lead to reduced snowpack levels.
Models for precipitation are less straightforward. The A2 scenario shows a small decrease in average annual precipitation while the B1 scenario shows very little change in annual precipitation throughout the
June 2018 O-7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change region. The change in precipitation is not significant in either scenario. The RWMG should continue to monitor precipitation projections as updated projections become available.
The predicted increase in temperature and variability of precipitation is consistent with climate change impacts expected throughout the state. Additionally, these changes are expected to create a multitude of indirect impacts, including increased wildfire, decreased water supply, decreased snowpack, and threats to habitat and biodiversity. The following discusses impacts likely to occur in the IRWMP area as a result of climate change.
Mean Annual High Temperature 90 88 86 84 82 80 78 76 74 TemperatureDegrees Fahrenheit) ( 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 Linear (B1) Linear (A2)
Figure O-1. Predicted change in mean annual high temperature under B1 and A2 scenarios.
Mean Annual Inches of Precipitation per Decade 30
25
20
15 Precipitation (inches) 10 195019601970198019902000201020202030204020502060207020802090
B1 A2 Linear (B1) Linear (A2)
Figure O-2. Predicted change in mean annual Inches of precipitation under B1 and A2 scenarios.
June 2018 O-8 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.4 Climate Change Impacts
The direct impacts of climate change described above will have a variety of indirect impacts on the region. Although extreme effort should be taken to reduce GHG emissions in order to reduce the impacts of climate change, climate change impacts are unavoidable. For this reason, recognizing these impacts and developing strategies to adapt to them is essential to create regional resiliency.
The following climate change impacts are those that are related to water and are most likely to occur within the IRWMP region. This list is not exhaustive, and climate change impacts should continue to be reassessed as additional information becomes available.
Figure O-3. Visual overview of climate change impacts.
O.4.1 Water Supply
Water supply is a primary concern for the IRWMP region with regard to climate change. Agriculture is a primary drier of the local economy and farmlands within the region provide food resources to the rest of the country. For these reasons, water availability for agricultural use is crucial. A number of factors related to climate change could lead to reduced water supplies.
Limited Water Storage Capacity
Additional water storage may be needed if a greater portion of precipitation occurs as rainfall, or if there are more rain-on-snow events. A reasonable option for increasing surface storage at Lake Success is being pursued. Storage could be increased by constructing Temperance Flat Dam upstream of Friant Dam, but the future of the proposed project is uncertain and it would require a lengthy period of time to permit, design and construct. The region must therefore currently rely on groundwater storage to increase water reserves and reliability. Recharge basins are not as effective as surface storage in capturing water supplies since they can only accommodate limited flows and the capacity of the Friant-Kern Canal is limited.
June 2018 O-9 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
Precipitation
Climate change can directly affect the volume, timing, and type of precipitation, which could then impact water availability. Climate change could cause a reduction in surface water supplies from the Delta, San Joaquin River watershed (Friant CVP water) and Tule River watershed through changes in precipitation patterns and/or a shift to more rain and less snow.
The impacts of climate change on rainfall is unclear, however it is predicted that climate change will cause an increase in the number and severity of extreme weather events, including storms and droughts. Periods without rain are expected to become longer, creating increasingly severe drought events. Although the region has depended on groundwater resources during past drought events, additional strategies are needed to increase resiliency as drought events become more severe.
Although a significant amount of snow does not fall within the IRWMP region, the majority of surface water is supplied by snowmelt from the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east. The agriculture community depends on snowmelt as it supplies a steady source of water during the dry late spring and summer months. Warmer temperatures will cause more precipitation to fall as rain instead of snow, which will decrease the amount of snowpack and the amount of water available water during dry months. Additionally, the precipitation that does fall as snow will melt sooner and more quickly, which will make it difficult to store and use.
Evapotranspiration
Evapotranspiration is a primary factor regulating land surface moisture and the process by which surface water enters the atmosphere. Evapotranspiration is the combined name of evaporation and transpiration and refers to the process by which water is evaporated from leaves through plant transpiration during photosynthesis. It varies due to a multitude of factors including wind, temperature, humidity, water availability, and plant type. These factors can increase a plant’s evapotranspiration rate, which increases its water demand.
Temperature has a positive correlation with evapotranspiration, meaning that increasing temperature will lead to increased evapotranspiration, which will then increase the demand for water. Because temperature is projected to increase under both climate scenarios, evapotranspiration rates are expected to increase significantly over the next century. Figure O-4. Diagram of Evapotranspiration
June 2018 O-10 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.4.2 Water Quality
Although water quality within the Tule River Basin is generally considered good, contamination does exist. This contamination is primarily caused by irrigated agriculture in the region. Although many programs are in place to identify and limit the discharge of pollutants from farmlands, it is still a key factor for managing water quality in the region.
Although it is unclear how precipitation will be impacted by climate change, it is likely that storm severity will increase. This would increase erosion, which would increase surface water turbidity. Increased air temperatures would also decrease dissolved oxygen content in waterbodies, which could be exacerbated by algal blooms leading to eutrophication.
The increased risk of wildfires as a result of climate change could create bare soil which may result in in runoff and sedimentation. The loss of stream bank vegetation as a result of wildfire may also lead to stream instability and stream bank erosion, which cause increased sediment loads and decreased water quality.
O.4.3 Flooding
Flooding poses numerous risks to infrastructure within the IRWMP region. Significant infrastructure, including some critical infrastructure, lies within the 200-year floodplain of the Tule River. Climate change may contribute to flooding through extreme storm events, increased wildfire, and rain on snow events.
Extreme storm events, including short periods of heavy rain, can cause flooding as water accumulates on the ground surface faster than infiltration. This can degrade the quality of habitat and threaten native species, as well as pose risk to critical infrastructure.
Wildfire reduces vegetative groundcover, which in turn limits the ability of water to infiltrate into the soil. Wildfire can also lead to hydrophobic soils. Hydrophobic soils are water resistant and cause high runoff, which can contribute to flooding.
Increased temperatures may lead to rain on snow events. Because snow is not able to infiltrate into the soil, this increases the probability of high runoff.
O.4.4 Wildfire
Wildfire is a natural form of disturbance and provides significant benefits to certain ecosystems. However, wildfire can lead to poor water quality and flooding by reducing infiltration and increasing eriosion and turbidity. Rising temperatures and extreme drought events are both anticipated in the IRWMP region as a result of climate change. Both increased temperature and drought contribute to decreased moisture levels in the area, which is then highly susceptible to high-intensity wildfire.
June 2018 O-11 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.4.5 Effects of Climate Change on Runoff and Recharge
As discussed above, climate change has multiple impacts on the amount, intensity, timing, quality, and variability of runoff and recharge. The intensity and amount of runoff may be increased as a result of wildfire and rain on snow events, and exacerbated by extreme storm events. High runoff contributes to flooding and diminished water quality as sediment loads are increased.
Climate change may limit recharge in a variety of ways. Increased evapotranspiration leads to increased water use by plants, which limits the amount of water available for recharge. Wildfire limits vegetative cover and promotes hydrophobic soils which reduces soil infiltration and can lead to flooding. Extreme storm events and flooding cause water to be trapped at the surface, which allows the water to evaporate before recharge can occur.
O.4.6 Effects of Sea Level Rise
Although the region is approximately 100 miles from the ocean, sea level rise could significantly impact water availability. Approximately 24% of the Region’s total water demand is met through federally contracted water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, which is at risk because of salt-water intrusion.
Saltwater intrusion is the movement of saline water into fresh aquifers and is exacerbated by sea level rise. Saltwater intrusion is usually the result of excessive over drafting of coastal aquifers which results in seawater being “pulled” into the coastal aquifer. This increases the salinity of the water in the aquifer, which causes it to be unsuitable for beneficial uses. Saltwater intrusion in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta could significantly decrease the region’s surface water supply.
June 2018 O-12 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.5 Regional Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
A vulnerability assessment was performed for the Tule Basin using the ‘Vulnerability Assessment Checklist’ found in the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning (DWR and EPA, 2011). The assessment, provided below, offers a practical evaluation of climate change vulnerabilities related to water demand, water supply, water quality, flooding, ecosystems, habitats, and hydropower.
1. Water Demand
1.a - Are there major industries that require cooling/process water in your planning region? Yes. The region includes fruit, vegetable, cheese and milk processing plants, but the temperature of the process water is not likely a major factor, and in many cases groundwater is used. No major power plant or industrial/processing plants that rely on cool water are found in the region.
1.b - Does water use vary by more than 50% seasonally in parts of your region? Yes. Seasonal water use varies substantially (greater than 50%) in the Tule River Basin. Most of the water is used from late spring to the end of summer for crop irrigation and urban landscape irrigation. Approximately one-third of urban water demands occur in the winter with the other two-thirds in the summer. Irrigation water demands are typically low in the winter since effective precipitation can provide most of the needed water. Some of the crop land is also idled in the winter or is planted to permanent crops that are dormant in winter.
1.c - Are crops grown in your region climate-sensitive? Would shifts in daily heat patterns, such as how long heat lingers before night-time cooling, be prohibitive for some crops? The region experiences hot dry summers. As a result, many of the crops grown have good resistance to heat. Therefore, changes in heat patterns would probably only impact crop yields if there is a significant increase in temperature. The primary concern with higher temperatures is that it will increase evapotranspiration and thus increase water demands. Freezing temperatures are sometimes a problem and can damage crops, but they are also beneficial to some permanent crops that need a certain number of chilling hours for an effective dormancy and to kill certain pests. Therefore, a reduction in the number of freezing days could negatively impact some crops.
1.d - Do groundwater supplies in your region lack resiliency after drought events? No, groundwater supplies have generally been resilient over the long-term. The region experiences years where almost 100% of demands are met with groundwater and other years when the vast majority of demands are met with surface water. After dry periods, the groundwater has generally recovered after a sufficient wet period, aided by a large network of groundwater recharge basins and natural groundwater recharge. The region experienced historic groundwater level lows in the 1930’s and 1940’s, but fully recovered by the 1980’s due to surface water development and wet periods. Recently, with consecutive dry years coupled with impacts from San Joaquin River Restoration, groundwater levels are in a state of decline. Reductions in State Water Project (SWP) water supply reliability have further aggravated the recovery.
1.e - Are water use curtailment measures effective in your region? Urban agencies, such as the City of Porterville, have a variety of conservation measures and these are effective at reducing demands in dry years. Agricultural water supplies are ultimately controlled by the
June 2018 O-13 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
hydrology and less surface water is delivered in dry years. This does not actually reduce water demands as growers pump groundwater to meet the remaining demand. If, however, groundwater levels continue to decline, then groundwater will become less reliable as the primary supply. The area has some hardened demand due to a large number of permanent plantings, so new (additional) water conservation programs may have to be implemented in the future if less surface water is available. Future curtailments may also be necessary due to recent State legislation that will require groundwater supplies to be managed for long-term sustainability.
1.f - Are some instream flow requirements in your region either currently insufficient to support aquatic life, or occasionally unmet? All rivers and streams in the region are ephemeral and have never maintained year round fisheries. There are no minimum environmental releases in the local rivers and streams.
2. Water Supply
2.a - Does a portion of the water supply in your region come from snowmelt? Yes, the majority of surface water comes from snowmelt in the Tule River watershed. The watershed extends up to a maximum elevation of 9,300 feet and much of the precipitation occurs as snowfall. As a result, the region is vulnerable to climate change impacts on snow including earlier spring runoffs, less water storage as snowpack and more frequent rain-on-snow events that could result in more reservoir flood releases.
2.b - Does part of your region rely on water diverted from the Delta, imported from the Colorado River, or imported from other climate-sensitive systems outside your region? No water is imported from the Colorado River into the Region. Water is imported from the San Joaquin River watershed, which generally has the same climate change vulnerabilities as the Tule River watershed. Delta water is not directly used in the region, but Delta water curtailments do have an important indirect impact on local groundwater supplies. Several water agencies located just west of the IRWMP area use Delta water. When Delta water deliveries are reduced they increase their reliance on large well fields located near the western border of the IRWMP area. These large well fields have notable impacts on groundwater levels in the region. The Friant Division, CVP contracts are based on an exchange requiring movement of water from the Delta to the exchanging entities and without the Delta diversions, the San Joaquin River Supply contribution to satisfying local demands would be considerably reduced.
2.c - Does part of your region rely on coastal aquifers? Has salt intrusion been a problem in the past? No. The region does not rely on coastal aquifers.
2.d - Would your region have difficulty in storing carryover supply surpluses from year to year? Storage reservoirs that serve the region include Kaweah Lake (Kaweah River) and Millerton Lake (San Joaquin River). Success Reservoir is operated by the USACE primarily for flood control. The reservoir volume is typically reduced to less than 10,000 AF in the fall to provide space for floodwaters. As a result, there is little to no potential for carryover storage. Millerton Lake has some limited capacity to store carryover water from year to year. The space to store the water and ability to keep it in storage, depends on the annual hydrology. In some years, agencies can carryover water, but in many years they cannot. The only real potential for improving carryover storage is through groundwater recharge and banking projects, unless new additional surface storage is built.
June 2018 O-14 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
2.e - Has your region faced a drought in the past during which it failed to meet local water demands? Yes. Surface water supplies are reduced during droughts, but groundwater is generally used to meet shortfalls. As a result, almost all water demands have been met in past droughts. Recently, groundwater levels have reached close to historic lows and some wells have gone dry. Due to a very high demand for well drillers, some landowners have had to endure without a well for a period of time. But, in Terra Bella Irrigation District, the lack of surface water during drought conditions have failed to meet water demands of the District causing landowners to abandon farms.
2.f - Does your region have invasive species management issues at your facilities, along conveyance structures, or in habitat areas? Some invasive plant species, such as Arundo Donax, can clog natural channels and canals if they are not properly managed, so most agencies include this as part of their maintenance activities. Agencies in the area have also been alerted to the potential for invasive species such as quagga mussels and how to help prevent their spread.
3. Water Quality
3.a - Are increased wildfires a threat in your region? If so, does your region include reservoirs with fire- susceptible vegetation nearby which could pose a water quality concern from increased erosion? No major reservoirs are located in the IRWMP area, but Success Reservoir is located just east of the Tule River Basin. Wildfires around the reservoir and in the Tule River watershed could result in flooding or water quality problems in the local rivers.
3.b - Does part of your region rely on surface water bodies with current or recurrent water quality issues related to eutrophication, such as low dissolved oxygen or algal blooms? Are there other water quality constituents potentially exacerbated by climate change? Local agencies use algaecides such as copper sulfate to control algae in conveyance facilities. These efforts are effective, but may have to be increased if climate change creates conditions that promote more algae growth.
3.c - Are seasonal low flows decreasing for some waterbodies in your region? If so, are the reduced low flows limiting the waterbodies’ assimilative capacity? The region has experienced very dry years, where groundwater meets all water demands, to very wet years, where surface water meets most demands. Changes in annual low flows from climate change would be difficult to identify since low flows already vary due to natural climate variations and management of reservoir releases. The region will, however, continue to monitor and evaluate hydrologic data for long- term trends.
3.d - Are there beneficial uses designated for some water bodies in your region that cannot always be met due to water quality issues? No. Generally the surface waters have excellent quality, largely because they are derived from Sierra snowmelt. In a few isolated areas, the water has had quality problems from anthropogenic sources, such as herbicides.
3.e Does part of your region currently observe water quality shifts during rain events that impact treatment facility operation? Yes. Surface waters in the region generally have good to excellent quality, but during storms turbidity values can increase substantially and can affect operations at groundwater recharge facilities.
June 2018 O-15 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
4. Sea Level Rise
The Tule Basin is approximately 100 miles from the ocean and several hundred feet above existing sea level, so sea level rise is not a concern.
5. Flooding
5.a - Does critical infrastructure in your region lie within the 200-year floodplain? DWR’s best available floodplain maps are available at: http://www.water.ca.gov/floodmgmt/lrafmo/fmb/fes/best_available_maps/. Significant infrastructure, including some critical infrastructure, lies within the 200-year floodplain of the Tule River.
5.b - Does part of your region lie within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Drainage District? No.
5.c - Does aging critical flood protection infrastructure exist in your region? No significant levee system is associated with the Tule River. Success Dam was constructed in the 1958 - 1961, but is considered to be in good condition.
5.d - Have flood control facilities (such as impoundment structures) been insufficient in the past? No. Flood control facilities have performed adequately in the past. Large floods in the 1950s prompted the construction of Success Dam, whose primarily function is flood control. Since then the dam has prevented large scale flooding in the Tule River Basin, although the reservoir is undersized for a very large flood. Localized flooding does commonly occur along creeks and due to poor drainage in some areas.
5.e - Are wildfires a concern in parts of your region? Wildfires are generally not a concern in the region. They are a concern, however, in the Tule River watershed. Wildfires can result in flooding, severe short-term erosion and water quality degradation of surface waters.
6. Ecosystem and Habitat Vulnerability
6.a - Does your region include inland or coastal aquatic habitats vulnerable to erosion and sedimentation issues? No.
6.b - Does your region include estuarine habitats which rely on seasonal freshwater flow patterns? No.
6.c - Do climate-sensitive fauna or flora populations live in your region? Yes. A large variety of flora and fauna are found in the Tule River Basin and some are likely climate sensitive. The region is highly developed so some have limited ability to migrate as a means of adapting to climate change.
June 2018 O-16 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
6.d - Do endangered or threatened species exist in your region? Are changes in species distribution already being observed in parts of your region? Yes, a number of threatened and endangered species are found in the Tule River Basin. It is unknown if species distribution is occurring due to climate change since little data is available on the topic.
6.e - Does the region rely on aquatic or water-dependent habitats for recreation or other economic activities? There are limited recreational opportunities in the local river system, including swimming, canoeing and bird watching. These have a relatively small impact on the local economy.
6.f - Are there rivers in your region with quantified environmental flow requirements or known water quality/quantity stressors to aquatic life? The Tule River and Deer Creek have historically been ephemeral and do not have minimum flow requirements. They have never supported a year-round fishery.
6.g - Do estuaries, coastal dunes, wetlands, marshes, or exposed beaches exist in your region? If so, are coastal storms possible/frequent in your region? No.
6.h - Does your region include one or more of the habitats described in the Endangered Species Coalition’s Top 10 habitats vulnerable to climate change (http://www.itsgettinghotoutthere.org/)? The Tule River Basin is not included in the list of ‘Top 10 Habitats Vulnerable to Climate Change’ referenced above. The watershed, however, is located in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, which is on the list.
6.i - Are there areas of fragmented estuarine, aquatic, or wetland wildlife habitat within your region? Are there movement corridors for species to naturally migrate? Are there infrastructure projects planned that might preclude species movement? The area is largely developed with agriculture, ranches and urban areas. Habitat is generally fragmented in the Tule River Basin. Wildlife could feasibly travel between habitat areas through agricultural land, ranch land or along the river corridors. No large infrastructure projects are planned that would further preclude species movement.
7. Hydropower
7.a - Is hydropower a source of electricity in your region? No hydropower facilities are located in the Tule River Basin below Success Dam. The upstream Tule River power generating facility is located on the discharge from Success Reservoir, which is outside the Tule River IWRM Boundary.
7.b - Are energy needs in your region expected to increase in the future? If so, are there future plans for hydropower generation facilities or conditions for hydropower generation in your region? Energy demands will likely increase due to population growth. Energy conservation could help to reverse this trend. No major hydropower projects are planned for the area, with a second unit expansion of the Success Powerplant being deemed currently not feasible. Some small hydropower projects might be developed along canals, but these would be very small and produce only a small amount of energy.
June 2018 O-17 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.5.1 Summary of Vulnerability Assessment
Table O-6. Resource Management Strategies to Address Local Climate Change Vulnerabilities
Category Vulnerabilities Resource Management Strategies Agricultural water use efficiency; Urban Seasonal variability, climate- water use efficiency; Agricultural lands Water Demand sensitive crops, high crop water stewardship; Economic Incentives; demands Outreach and Engagement; Conveyance – Regional/Local; System reoperation; Conjunctive Management Decreased snowpack storage, and Groundwater Storage; Precipitation Diminished groundwater Water Supply Enhancement; Recycled municipal water; supplies, extreme drought Surface Storage – CALFED; Surface Storage events, – Regional/Local; Watershed Management; Agricultural lands stewardship; Ecosystem restoration; Recharge Area Protection; Lower dissolved oxygen levels in Sediment Management; Drinking Water waterbodies, increased Treatment and Distribution; Groundwater Water Quality sedimentation and turbidity, Remediation /Aquifer Remediation; Land potential algal blooms and Use Planning and Management; Matching eutrophication Quality to Use; Pollution Prevention; Salt and Salinity Management; Urban Runoff Management; Watershed Management; Sea Level Rise Basin is not coastal N/A Flood risk planning; Agricultural lands High runoff from wildfire and Flooding stewardship; Land Use Planning and rain-on-snow events Management; Urban Runoff Management; Agricultural lands stewardship; Ecosystem Climate sensitive flora and restoration; Forest Management; Ecosystem and fauna32, endangered or Recharge Area Protection; Sediment Habitat threatened species, climate Management; Land Use Planning and Vulnerability sensitive habitats31, habitat Management; Pollution Prevention; Salt fragmentation and degradation and Salinity Management; Watershed Management; System Reoperation; Agricultural water use efficiency; Urban water use efficiency; Hydropower Increased energy demands Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage;
June 2018 O-18 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.5.2 Vulnerability Prioritization
The assessment identified above noted climate change vulnerabilities in the Tule River Basin. These all need to be addressed to some extent, but the higher priority vulnerabilities are described below. These vulnerabilities are listed in their order of importance based on urgency, risk, and feasibility of addressing vulnerability using the previously mentioned resource management strategies.
Table O-7. Vulnerabilities are Prioritized based on Urgency, Feasibility to Address and Risk
Feasibility of Priority Category Vulnerability Urgency Addressing Risk Vulnerability 1 Water Demand Seasonal Variability High High High Decreased Snowpack 1 Water Supply High High High Storage Increased 1 Water Quality Sedimentation and High Medium High Turbidity Algal Blooms, Eutrophication and 1 Water Quality High Low High other water quality problems 1 Flooding Wildfires High Medium High Increasing Crop Water 2 Water Demand Medium Low High Demands 2 Water Supply Drought High Low Medium 2 Flooding Rain-On snow events High Low Medium Ecosystem and Habitat Fragmentation 2 Habitat Medium High Medium and Degradation Vulnerability Ecosystem and Climate Sensitive Flora 2 Habitat Low Low High and Fauna Vulnerability 3 Water Demand Climate Sensitive Crops Low Medium Medium Diminished 3 Water Supply Low Low Medium Groundwater Supplies Increased Energy 3 Hydropower Medium Medium Low Demands
O.5.3 Further Data Gathering and Analysis of Prioritized Vulnerabilities
Future data gathering and analysis will fall under two broad categories: 1) hydrologic and meteorologic data to characterize climate change trends, and 2) climate change literature and related legislation.
The Tule River Basin includes an extensive monitoring network that provides data on streams, rivers, reservoirs, groundwater and climate. This data will continue to be evaluated on a regular basis and
June 2018 O-19 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
potential trends will be identified. Changes in hydrology and climate can be caused by climate change or simply natural variability, but long-term consistent changes could point towards climate change. These monitoring programs are evaluated on a regular basis and, if needed, they will be expanded so they can adequately assess climate change.
A substantial number of climate change publications are produced each year, including some that assess local climatic conditions in the Tule River area. These studies are performed by various government agencies, non-governmental organizations, academic institutions and graduate students. The Regional Water Management Group will take advantage of these efforts and regularly review literature that comes from reputable sources.
The Regional Water Management Group will also monitor climate change related legislation that could impact project operations, regulatory requirements, project funding and greenhouse gas emissions.
O.6 Climate Change Adaption
Due to the unavoidability of Climate Change impacts, adaption is a primary component of effective Climate Action Planning. Climate change adaption involves assessing regional vulnerabilities to climate change impacts in order to develop strategies to increase regional resiliency if, and when, those impacts do occur. Adaption strategies can range from infrastructure improvements to changes in public policy, however they must have the goal to help the region adapt to climate change impacts.
This section will address the direct impacts of climate change on the region, discuss their implications on local ecology, the economy, and public safety, and identify adaption solutions to increase the region’s resilience to climate change.
O.6.1 Water Supply
As previously discussed, increased temperatures and irregular precipitation patterns would impact water supply in a variety of ways. A reduction in water supply would have the greatest impact on agriculture, which is the region’s primary economic driver. Decreased water supply could reduce the region’s agricultural productivity, which would greatly impact the local economy. Additionally, a reduction in water supply could lead to water shortages in the region’s low income unincorporated communities which could result in impacts to public safety.
Adapting to reductions in water supply caused by climate change will involve two overarching strategies: Reducing water demand and increasing water supply. Strategies to reduce water demand include technological investments to increase agricultural and urban water use efficiency, promotion of low water or drought tolerant crops, monetary incentives, and public outreach and education. Strategies to expand water supplies include conjunctive management, recycling of wastewater, and expanding surface water storage and groundwater recharge facilities.
June 2018 O-20 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.6.2 Water Quality
Increased water temperature, storm severity and stream instability could lead to eutrophication, as well as excess runoff and sedimentation which would have a large impact on water quality in the region. This, in turn, would impact ecosystem health and pubic safety.
Increased temperatures could decrease the oxygen content in water, which would negatively impact aquatic ecosystems. This impact could be reduced through the creation of deep pools or artificial logjams, which would provide shade or deep water that limits direct heating from sunlight. These would serve as a biotic refugia to support biological communities.
Impacts of excessive runoff and sedimentation can be reduced through green infrastructure strategies, including implementation of retention ponds and stormwater tree trenches to store and filter stormwater runoff. Impacts of impaired water quality on public safety can be addressed through implementation of water treatment facilities.
O.6.3 Flooding
Flooding as a result of increased storm severity and reduced vegetative cover could cause significant impacts to infrastructure and public safety. The impacts of flooding can be minimized by increasing capacity for wastewater and stormwater collection and treatment and building flood barriers to protect major infrastructure. Additionally, policies can be implemented to restrict building in flood-prone areas and relocate critical facilities to higher elevations.
O.6.4 Saltwater Intrusion
Saltwater intrusion as a result of sea level rise would impair water supply from the San Joaquin Delta, which would significantly impact the region’s total water supply. Adapting to saltwater intrusion will require reducing dependence on the Delta to support agricultural production. The regions dependence on the delta can be reduced by increasing agricultural water use efficiency, promoting drought tolerant / low water crops, and practicing conjunctive management strategies.
O.7 Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Project Review Process
Climate change mitigation can be achieved by reducing energy demands, improving energy efficiency and carbon sequestration. These will help to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere. Climate change mitigation will require global cooperation, but the Regional Water Management Group supports reasonable efforts to make their own local contribution. As a result, it is sensible to consider impacts to GHG when selecting and prioritizing projects. This criterion will generally be a lower priority than water supply or water quality, but it is still considered important. When projects are reviewed and prioritized the project proponents will need to answer the following questions:
1. Will this project increase greenhouse gas emissions? If yes, explain how and quantify. 2. Will this project result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions? If yes, explain how and quantify.
June 2018 O-21 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section O – Climate Change
O.8 Consideration of Climate Change in Project Review Process
As previously discussed, climate change could have many adverse effects on the region including changes in the timing and amount of precipitation, higher evaporation and transpiration from higher temperatures, increased frequency of droughts and floods, reduction in water quality, increased wildfires and increased presence of certain pests.
Developing projects that can address these issues is important. When projects are reviewed and prioritized their contribution to addressing climate change will be considered. In particular, project proponents will need to answer the following questions:
1. Will the proposed project reduce vulnerability to anticipated impacts from climate change? If yes, explain and quantify. 2. Will the proposed project help the region to adapt to climate change impacts, or increase resiliency to climate change impacts? If yes, explain and quantify. 3. Will the proposed project help to increase the region’s understanding of climate change impacts and local vulnerabilities? If yes, please explain.
June 2018 O-22
Section P Water Management Opportunities
Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section P – Water Management Opportunities
Section P – Water Management Opportunities
P.1 Introduction
This section concludes the IRWM Plan by identifying opportunities to improve regional water management. In doing so, this section:
1. Identifies solutions to stakeholder identified problems 2. Discusses the processes of plan implementation 3. Illustrates project integration to meet multiple resource management objectives
P.2 Water Management Opportunities
P.2.1 Water Supply Augmentation Measures
There are a number of water supply augmentation measures which are currently being contemplated. Amongst these are programs which are pertinent to other organizations and those which are driven by regulations and guidelines. As is the case with the IRWMP area, these programs have somewhat of a division between municipal and industrial water management issues and those of the agricultural community.
Augmentation measures related to municipal and industrial uses include putting shuttered groundwater extraction facilities back into operation with the assistance of treatment methodologies. As shuttering wells from systems due to contamination often causes a skew within the groundwater reservoir, problems associated with mounding and over-drafting can be partially addressed with a more even distribution of water extraction made available by utilizing mechanisms such as well head treatment.
A water supply augmentation program is currently operated by the Lower Tule River Irrigation District. Under this program, partners of the Lower Tule River Irrigation District participate in the construction of groundwater banking facilities and the purchase of water supplies during wet years to recharge these facilities. The partners have access to this water in dry years when local water supplies are insufficient to meet demand. This program is collaborative, encourages groundwater sustainability, and increases the district’s resiliency to drought and climate change. This program could be expanded throughout the IRWMP area to increase supply in other water management planning areas.
Several opportunities exist to address agricultural water supply augmentation. These opportunities vary in terms of their level of development. One developed program involves those related to the San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement actions. This program offers funding assistance for programs which are designed to replace the water supply lost as a result of previously allocated water from the San Joaquin River to the River below Millerton Reservoir for purposes of reintroduction and maintenance of an anadromous fishery. Most, if not all members of DCTRA are affected by the Settlement action and are therefore eligible to participate in the program to mitigate the effects of Settlement implementation.
June 2018 P-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section P – Water Management Opportunities
A program involving the improvement of the surface water distribution system in the northern part of the Porterville Irrigation District is currently in the project development phase. While it would be a paradigm shift for the PID to deliver water directly to all of its landowners/growers, the Board of Directors is considering this program due to the declining levels of groundwater in the subject area. PID would utilize its Friant Division, CVP contract as the principal mechanism to provide water to these facilities, augmented from agreements with mutual water companies with pre-1914 water rights from the Tule River.
Additional programs have been discussed to augment the water supply and improve the delivery of water to concentrated water use areas, such as East Porterville. Augmentation of the groundwater extractions in this area would allow for existing groundwater conditions to remain, to the extent that demand could be offset by an imported supply in lieu of groundwater pumping. This program would provide benefit to East Porterville, a portion of the agricultural community, and downstream municipal and industrial users, such as the City of Porterville.
Programs based on cooperative partnerships between municipal and industrial water consumers are currently being developed. For example, the City of Porterville works with property owners to recycle wastewater for agricultural use outside of town. This augments groundwater supply for municipal and industrial purposes.
Banking programs have been developed which call for partners to supply Central Valley Project water water (Friant Division Class 1) for groundwater recharge during above-normal and wet years in exchange for water reimbursement during dry years. The amount of water required from partners during wet years is determined based on negotiated ratios that reflect the value of dry year surface water entitlement.
P.2.2 Water Demand Reduction Measures
A number of water demand reduction measures are already in effect within the DCTRA IRWM area. Principal amongst these are the utilization of rate structures associated with metered deliveries for domestic, commercial and industrial consumption with accompanying rate structures which can be varied to encourage conservation. In addition, household plumbing retrofits and installation of improved technology, including low-flow plumbing devices, are mandated to be installed in new construction, as well as retrofits requiring a building permit.
On the agricultural use side, considerable improvement in agricultural irrigation delivery efficiency has been accomplished over the last several decades. Complete conversion of fields from furrow and flood irrigation to low-volume micro sprinkler and drip irrigation has occurred. These conversions are common within the permanent plantings areas of IRWMP area. The greatest opportunity for demand reduction, however, is that associated with the elimination of multi-cropping in a single year. Double cropping in certain parts of the IRWMP area is common as the growing season is year-round and readily accommodates both summer and winter crops. In some cases, adjustment of crop types and the nature of the harvest has allowed for both triple-cropping and quadruple-cropping. The impacts of these cropping choices on the groundwater reservoir when there is insufficient surface water supply is beginning to be understood. It is likely that demand reduction procedures undertaken in the future will call for the reduction and/or elimination of a significant portion of this multiple-cropping if declining groundwater level trends are to be abated.
June 2018 P-2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section P – Water Management Opportunities
P.2.3 Flood Control Projects and Programs
Flood control facilities are being considered for Frashier Creek, Deer Creek and White River. In addition, off-stream storage related to the Friant-Kern Canal and its relationship to flood flows on the San Joaquin River has given rise to the evaluation of Hungry Hollow as a potential off-stream storage site. This concept was included in the proposed East Side Division, CVP, the planning of which was abandoned by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. To date, projects on minor stream systems have not been given consideration due to the low-volume discharges from these facilities and the infrequency of storm-water and flood related events. Whether this remains the situation in the future is yet to be determined.
P.2.4 Water Quality Improvement Opportunities
The most significant future opportunities for groundwater quality improvement lie in outreach education and employment of Best Management Practices related to application of pesticides and herbicides. This educational component applies to both the urban and rural development regions of the IRWM area, as well as the agricultural areas. Both areas are potential sources of contamination leading to the degradation of groundwater supplies. Avoidance of contamination is the strongest method to assuring future beneficial use capability of existing surface and groundwater supplies.
The pilot disadvantaged community drinking water outreach program currently being developed by the Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District (KDWCD), will hopefully identify additional water quality improvement opportunities. It is acknowledged that most water quality improvements within both the KDWCD IRWMP area and the DCTRA IRWMP area will be oriented to human consumption purposes. Levels of constituents, such as those of nitrates, may benefit agriculture but are averse to human health. Likewise, pumping groundwater with residual quantities of DBCP and 1,2,3-TCP is not averse to agricultural operations and allows for reduction in the level of these contaminants in the environment, but can lead to volatilization associated with pumping and exposure to sunlight when applied for irrigation application purposes. The pursuit of the implementation of this pilot program is currently a priority of Tule River Basin IRWM and, to date, has received a positive response from the representatives of potential beneficiaries of this process.
P.3 Other Water Management Measures
P.3.1 Land Use Policies
Of critical importance in the water resources management opportunities which exist within the DCTRA IRWMP area, is the matter of improved land use policy decisions. Currently, most land use policy decisions, particularly those which allow for the placement of developed subdivisions and farmworker housing installations in areas with known groundwater contamination, occur without thought to that existing contamination. It is a goal of the DCTRA IRWMP to intensify discussions with land use policy decision makers, bringing attention to the gravity of this situation and providing input as to how their land use planning policies could avoid many of the adverse drinking water situations which are being developed. If the resolution of providing high quality drinking water to rural residents is to be properly addressed, the land use policy decision making process is the first and foremost arena in which attention to improvement needs to be given.
June 2018 P-3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section P – Water Management Opportunities
P.3.2 Water Supplies for New Development
In addition to groundwater quality, groundwater quantity should be taken into account when addressing the proper placement of new development to ensure adequate water supplies exist. Policies, such as those that have been developed for the City of Porterville to evaluate the relationship between the development of a project and water balance, will need to be extended to other areas within the region.
These policies have resulted in a recommendation to require impact fees for developed projects to generate funding to for future water purchase. Additional policy considerations associated with the City of Porterville will also need to be given in the future. Their recent policy, calling for maintaining a position of only extracting water from the groundwater reservoir where said extractions are within the safe yield of the groundwater structure, will bring about a myriad of changes in lifestyle. In particular, landscaping considerations under this type of policy adoption would be considerably different than those which currently exist. High volume demands for landscaping during summer months would virtually need to be eliminated. In addition, conservation practices would need to be employed, such as the rural practice of utilizing water supplies to introduce moisture into the dirt for dust abatement and atmospheric cooling conditions. In an over-drafted groundwater basin, it is envisioned that future policies will be directed principally at these two related urban water uses. New developments will lead the way with landscaping requirements and provisions for dust control built into project development considerations. Eventually, it is envisioned that the policies and procedures which are generated as a result of applications for new development will roll over into existing rural development related ordinance restrictions. It is acknowledged that the current groundwater declining trends cannot be sustained into the future with water uses remaining status quo.
P.3.3 Agricultural Crop Water Management Measures
Previously noted, water demand reduction measures potentially exist where multiple cropping patterns contribute high water demands and groundwater overdraft. In addition to exacerbating water quality related concerns, over-drafting can lead to increased power consumption related to pumping, the need to develop additional power grid improvements to accommodate increases in power demand, and falling groundwater conditions which both reduces the useful life of the pumping unit and creates adverse conditions from an aesthetic perspective.
Already existing, but in somewhat an aggravated current condition, is the matter of subsidence. The importation of water, both on the east and west sides of the IRWMP area, has led to groundwater extractions over-drafting principally sand and gravel aquifers, in lieu of pulling water from the clay lenses in groundwater wells. Over-draft conditions currently occurring within the IRWMP planning area are pulling water molecules out of the clay lenses which eliminates the support structure offered by the water molecules and can lead to collapse due to the loss of structural support. Once this happens, the water storage capacity is permanently lost due to the weight of the overburden on the clay lens.
In addition to interference with the gravity delivery of surface water, numerous structural problems associated with roadways, drainage systems and constructed buildings, including single-family residences, occur. Evidence of this subsidence accelerating beyond historic levels is beginning to be documented. An element of the DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan is associated with documentation of this occurrence and the degree to which it exists. Improvements and a more significant outreach in this regard
June 2018 P-4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section P – Water Management Opportunities
are anticipated to be incorporated into the next update to the DCTRA Groundwater Management Plan, which is currently in progress.
P.3.4 County Systems Infrastructure Improvements
As the County of Tulare has elected to act in the role as lead agency for several rural hamlet water systems, monthly costs associated with the operation and maintenance of these systems has been observed to be a major issue. At the current time, many of these systems are having their costs subsidized by the General Fund of the County of Tulare and several attempts to correct this trend through Proposition 218 related procedures have met with failure. It should be recognized that this situation will intensify in the future as these systems become older and maintenance costs increase. Additionally, the costs associated with the replacement of obsolete and deteriorated facilities is high.
The affordability of drinking water supplies that meet applicable state and federal drinking water standards is a primary land use should become a critical element in water management planning. Systems deterioration and abandonment due to the lack of proper financial planning and land use planning are situations which are to be avoided based on policies and procedures associated with this IRWMP.
Pilot Studies
In an attempt to begin to address the issues related to disadvantaged community water supply and water quality related issues, the County of Tulare acted as lead agency for a multi-county effort to address water and wastewater related issues for disadvantaged communities. Four counties took part in this effort. The pilot studies address issues not only related to water quality, water supply and their related technical issues, but also administrative, managerial and finance issues critical to the maintenance and well-being of rural water supply systems. The fourth pilot study deals with individual household water supply and wastewater treatment and disposal systems. The final report is completed and is available for use.
SCADA Expansion
Another water management measure which is increasing in its importance to optimized water management is the installation and maintenance of Supervisory, Control and Data Acquisition Systems. Otherwise known as SCADA Systems, installation of same allows for remote monitoring and remote control of water management related facilities. Whether these facilities are surface water oriented, groundwater oriented or in response to power production, significant efficiencies can be achieved through the utilization of this equipment and its related software systems. Consideration of increased design, installation and maintenance of these systems within the IRWMP area is encouraged and offers opportunity for improved management of available water supply resources.
June 2018 P-5 Section Q References Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section Q – References
Section Q - References
“2014 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan.” San Luis Obispo County Water Resources, www.slocountywater.org/site/Frequent%20Downloads/Integrated%20Regional%20Water%20M anagement%20Plan/IRWM%20Plan%20Update%202014/pdf/Volume%201%202014%20SLO%20 IRWM%20Plan_20140724_reduced.pdf.
“Addressing Perchlorate Contamination of Drinking-Water Sources in California .” Senate Office of Research. State of California. “History of Perchlorate in California Drinking Water.” State Water Resources Control Board, www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/Perchloratehistory.shtml.
California Water Plan Update 2013; Department of Water Resources, State of California; 2012.
“CLU-IN | Contaminants > Perchlorate > Overview.” CLUIN News, EPA, clu- in.org/contaminantfocus/default.focus/sec/perchlorate/cat/Overview/.
“Deer Creek & Tule River Authority Groundwater Management Plan Update.” Lower Tule River Irrigation District.
De Groot, David, et al. “Sediment Discharge and Erosion Assessment Report.” California Water Boards State Water Research Control Board, Tule Basin Water Quality Coalition, 4 Feb. 2004, www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/irrigated_lands/water_quality/coalitions/t ule_basin/surface_water/2015_0204_tule_sdear.pdf+.
“Exploring California's Climate Change Research.” Cal-Adapt, cal-adapt.org/.
Groundwater Management Plan Update, Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District; 2007.
Groundwater Quality Protection Strategy; Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2010.
IPCC, 2014: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Mid-Pacific Region Bureau of Reclamation. “Mid-Pacific Region.” Central Valley Project Water Supply | Mid-Pacific Region, www.usbr.gov/mp/cvp-water/.
“National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 11 July 2017, www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations.
June 2018 Q-1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section Q – References
“Outreach and Engagement - A Resource Management Strategy of the California Water Plan.”California Department of Water Resources, California Natural Resources Agency, 29 July 2016, www.water.ca.gov/waterplan/docs/rms/2016/28_Outreach_Engagement_July2016.pdf+.
Peterson, David, et al. “Snowmelt Discharge Characteristics Sierra Nevada, CA.” U.S. Geological Survey, climate.ncsu.edu/edu/ClimateChange.
“Pixley Community Plan 2015 Update.” Tulare County, tularecounty.ca.gov/rma/assets/File/Pixley%20Community%20Plan%20-Adopted%206-16- 15.pdf.
“Sediment Management - A Resource Management Strategy of the California Water Plan.”California Department of Water Resources, www.water.ca.gov/waterplan/docs/rms/2016/25_Sediment_Mgt_July2016.pdf.
Stern, Charles, and Pervaze Sheikh. “Central Valley Project Operations: Background and Legislation.” Federation of American Scientists, fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44456.pdf.
“Strategies for Climate Change Adaptation.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 13 Nov. 2017, www.epa.gov/arc-x/strategies-climate-change-adaptation.
Time Series Evapotranspiration and Applied Water Estimates from Remote Sensing; Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District; Davids Engineering, Inc.; 2013.
Tulare County General Plan 2030; County of Tulare, State of California; 2012. “Tulare County General Plan Background Report.” Tulare County, generalplan.co.tulare.ca.us/documents/GeneralPlan2010/BackgroundReport.pdf.
“Water and Culture- A Resource Management Strategy of the California Water Plan.”California Department of Water Resources, California Natural Resources Agency, 29 July 2016, www.water.ca.gov/waterplan/docs/rms/2016/28_Outreach_Engagement_July2016.pdf+.
Water Quality Data, www.waterqualitydata.us/portal/.
Water Resources Investigation of the Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District; Fugro West, Inc.; 2003
June 2018 Q-2
Appendix A
Appendix A - 1 Appendix A - 2 Appendix A - 3 Appendix A - 4 Appendix A - 5 Appendix A - 6 Appendix A - 7 Appendix A - 8 Appendix A - 9 Appendix A - 10 Appendix A - 11 Appendix A - 12
Appendix B
IRWM Plan Standard: Governance Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Present in the IRWMP. Regulatory and/or Location of Standard From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Other Citations in Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) evaluation needed.
Document a governance structure to ensure updates to the IRWM Plan
The name of the RWMG responsible for y/n 18/35 implementation of the IRWMP CWC §10539
y/n 19/36 A description of the IRWM governance structure yes
Public outreach and involvement processes y/n/q 19/36-37 Appendix
Effective decision making y/n/q 19/37 B - 1
Balanced access and opportunity for participation y/n/q 19/37 in the IRWM process
Effective communication – both internal and y/n/q 19/37-38 external to the IRWM region
§10540, §10541
Long term implementation of the IRWM Plan y/n/q 19/38 IRWM Plan Standard: Governance Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Present in the IRWMP. Regulatory and/or Location of Standard From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Other Citations in Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) evaluation needed.
Coordination with neighboring IRWM efforts and y/n/q 19/38 State and federal agencies
The collaborative process(es) used to establish y/n/q 19/38 plan objectives
How interim changes and formal changes to the y/n/q 19/38 IRWM Plan will be performed
Appendix Updating or amending the IRWM Plan y/n/q 19/38
Publish NOI to prepare/update the plan; adopt y/n/q 35 CWC §10543
B the plan in a public meeting - 2 IRWM Plan Standard: Region Description Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Legislative Support Present in the IRWMP. Location of Standard in From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines and/or Other Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) Citations evaluation needed.
If applicable, describe and explain how the plan will help reduce dependence on the Delta supply y/n 20 -- regionally PRC §75026.(b)(1) and Describe watersheds and water systems y/n 19/39 CWP Update 2009
Describe internal boundaries y/n 19/39 --
Describe water supplies and demands for y/n 19/39 -- minimum 20 year planning horizon
Appendix Describe water quality conditions y/n 19/40 --
Describe social and cultural makeup, including
B specific information on DACs and tribal y/n/q 19/40 -- - communities in the region and their water 3 challenges.
Describe major water related objectives and y/n/q 19/40 §10541. (e)(3) conflicts * Explain how IRWM regional boundary was determined and why region is an appropriate area y/n/q 19/40 -- for IRWM planning. Describe neighboring and/or overlapping IRWM y/n 19/40 -- efforts Explain how opportunities are maximized (e.g. people at the table, natural features, y/n 38 -- infrastructure) for integration of water management activities * Requirement must be addressed. IRWM Plan Standard: Objectives Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Legislative Support Present in the IRWMP. Location of Standard in From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines and/or Other Brief Qualitative Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) Citations evaluation needed.
Through the objectives or other areas of the plan, y/n 20/40 - 41 §10540.( c ) the 7 items on pg 41 of GL are addressed.*
Describe the collaborative process and tools used to establish objectives: - How the objectives were developed - What information was considered (i.e., water management or local land use y/n 20/41 -- plans, etc.) - What groups were involved in the process - How the final decision was made and accepted by the IRWM effort
Identify quantitative or qualitative metrics and
Appendix measureable objectives: Objectives must be measurable - there must be some metric the IRWM region can use to y/n/q 20/41 - 42 10541.(e) determine if the objective is being met as the B IRWM Plan is implemented. Neither quantitative - 4 nor qualitative metrics are considered inherently better. *
Explain how objectives are prioritized or reason y/n/q 20/42-43 -- why the objectives are not prioritized
Reference specific overall goals for the region: y/n 43 -- RWMGs may choose to use goals as an additional layer for organizing and prioritizing objectives, or they may choose to not use the term at all. * Requirement must be addressed. IRWM Plan Standard: Resource Management Strategies (RMS) Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed. Identify RMS incorporated in the IRWM Plan: CWP Update 2009 Consider all California Water Plan (CWP) RMS criteria (29) y/n 20/43 Volume II; 10541(e)(1) listed in Table 3 from the CWP Update 2009 * Consideration of climate change effects on the IRWM region y/n 20/43 -- must be factored into RMS Address which RMS will be implemented in achieving IRWM y/n 44 -- Plan Objectives * Requirement must be addressed. Appendix B - 5 IRWM Plan Standard: Integration Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed.
Contains structure and processes for developing and fostering integration 1: §10540.(g); - Stakeholder/institutional y/n/q 20/44 - 45 §10541.(h)(2) - Resource - Project implementation
1. If not included as an individual section use Governance, Project Review Process, and Data Management Standards per November 2012 Guidelines, p. 44. Appendix B - 6 IRWM Plan Standard: Project Review Process Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Present in the IRWMP. Regulatory and/or Location of Standard in From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Other Citations Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) evaluation needed.
Process for projects included in IRWM plan must address 3 components: - procedures for submitting projects y/n 20/45 - procedures for reviewing projects - procedures for communicating lists of selected projects Does the project review process in the plan incorporate the following factors: y/n 20 How a project contributes to plan objectives
How a project is related to Resource Management y/n 20 Strategies identified in the plan. y/n 20 The technical feasibility of a project. Appendix y/n 20 A projects specific benefits to a DAC water issue. y/n 20 §75028.(a) B Environmental Justice considerations. - 7 y/n 20 Project costs and financing y/n 21 Address economic feasibility y/n 21 Project status Strategic implementation of plan and project y/n 21/48 merit Project's contribution to climate change y/n 21 adaptation Contribution of project in reducing GHGs y/n 21 compared to project alternatives Status of the Project Proponent's IRWM plan y/n 21 adoption Project's contribution to reducing dependence on Delta supply (for IRWM regions receiving water y/n 21 from the Delta). IRWM Plan Standard: Impact and Benefit Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Legislative Support Present in the IRWMP. Location of Standard in From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines and/or Other Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) Citations evaluation needed.
Discuss potential impacts and benefits of plan implementation within IRWM region, between regions, y/n 21 -- with DAC/EJ concerns and Native American Tribal communities State when a more detailed project-specific impact and benefit analysis will occur (prior to any implementation y/n 49 -- activity) Review and update the impacts and benefits section of the plan as part of the normal plan management y/n 50 -- activities Appendix B - 8 IRWM Plan Standard: Plan Performance and Monitoring Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Legislative Support Present in the IRWMP. Location of Standard in From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines and/or Other Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) Citations evaluation needed.
Contain performance measures and monitoring y/n 21/53 methods to ensure that IRWM objectives are met * PRC §75026.( a ) Contain a methodology that the RWMG will use to y/n 21/53 oversee and evaluate implementation of projects.
* Requirement must be addressed. Appendix B - 9 IRWM Plan Standard: Data Management Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Present in the IRWMP. Regulatory and/or Location of Standard in From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Other Citations Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) evaluation needed.
Describe data needs within the IRWM region y/n 54 --
Describe typical data collection techniques y/n 54 --
Describe stakeholder contributions of data to a y/n 54 -- data management system
Describe the entity responsible for maintaining y/n 54 -- data in the data management system Describe the QA/QC measures for data y/n 54 --
Appendix Explain how data collected will be transferred or shared between members of the RWMG and other interested parties throughout the IRWM y/n 54 --
B region, including local, State, and federal agencies -
10 * Explain how the Data Management System supports the RWMG's efforts to share collected y/n 54 -- data
Outline how data saved in the data management system will be distributed and remain compatible with State databases including CEDEN, Water Data Library (WDL), CASGEM, California y/n 54 -- Environmental Information Catalog (CEIC), and the California Environmental Resources Evaluation System (CERES).
* Requirement must be addressed. IRWM Plan Standard: Finance Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Legislative Support Present in the IRWMP. Location of Standard in From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines and/or Other Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative Grantee IRWM Plan Source Page(s) Citations evaluation needed.
Include a programmatic level (i.e. general) plan for implementation and financing of identified projects and y/n 21 programs* including the following:
List known, as well as, possible funding sources, programs, and grant opportunities for the development y/n 21 and ongoing funding of the IRWM Plan.
List the funding mechanisms, including water enterprise funds, rate structures, and private financing options, for y/n 21 §10541.( e )( 8 ) projects that implement the IRWM Plan.
An explanation of the certainty and longevity of known or potential funding for the IRWM Plan and projects that y/n 21 implement the Plan. Appendix An explanation of how operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for projects that implement the IRWM Plan y/n 21 would be covered and the certainty of operation and B
- maintenance funding. 11 * Requirement must be addressed. IRWM Plan Standard: Technical Analysis Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed.
Document the data and technical analyses that were used in y/n 22 -- the development of the plan * * Requirement must be addressed. Appendix B - 12 IRWM Plan Standard: Relation to Local Water Planning Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed.
y/n 22 Identify a list of local water plans used in the IRWM plan Discuss how the plan relates to these other planning y/n 22 documents and programs §10540.( b ) Describe the dynamics between the IRWM plan and other y/n 22 planning documents Describe how the RWMG will coordinate its water mgmt y/n 58 planning activities Appendix B - 13 IRWM Plan Standard: Relation to Local Land Use Planning Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed.
Document current relationship between local land use planning, regional water issues, and water management y/n 22/59 - 62 -- objectives
y/n 22/59 - 62 -- Document future plans to further a collaborative, proactive relationship between land use planners and water managers Appendix B - 14 IRWM Plan Standard: Stakeholder Involvement Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed.
Contain a public process that provides outreach and y/n 22/63 §10541.( g ) opportunity to participate in the IRWM plan *
Identify process to involve and facilitate stakeholders during development and implementation of plan regardless of y/n 64 §10541.(h) (2) ability to pay; include barriers to invlovement * Discuss involvement of DACs and tribal communities in the y/n 23 -- IRWM planning effort Describe decision-making process and roles that y/n 23 -- stakeholders can occupy Discuss how stakeholders are necessary to address y/n 23 -- objectives and RMS Discuss how a collaborative process will engage a balance in Appendix y/n 23 -- interest groups * Requirement must be addressed. B - 15 IRWM Plan Standard: Coordination Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed.
Identify the process to coordinate water management projects and activities of participating local agencies and y/n 23/65 stakeholders to avoid conflicts and take advantage of §10541.( e )(13) efficiencies *
Identify neighboring IRWM efforts and ways to cooperate or coordinate, and a discussion of any ongoing water y/n 23/65 -- management conflicts with adjacent IRWM efforts
Identify areas where a state agency or other agencies may be able to assist in communication or cooperation, or implementation of IRWM Plan components, processes, and y/n 23 -- projects, or where State or federal regulatory decisions are required before implementing the projects. Appendix * Requirement must be addressed. B - 16 IRWM Plan Standard: Climate Change Overall Standard Sufficient Yes Requirement Included Plan Standard Source Evidence of Sufficiency Sufficient
y/n - Present/Not 2012 IRWM Grant Location of Standard Present in the IRWMP. Legislative Support From IRWM Guidelines Program Guidelines in Grantee IRWM Brief Evaluation Narrative y/n If y/n/q qualitative and/or Other Citations Source Page(s) Plan evaluation needed.
Evaluate IRWM region's vulnerabilities to climate change and potential adaptation responses based on vulnerabilites y/n 23/66 - 73 Climate Change assessment in the DWR Climate Change Handbook for Handbook vulnerability Regional Water Planning * assessment: Provide a process that considers GHG emissions when y/n 23/68 http://www.water.ca.g choosing between project alternatives * ov/climatechange/CCH Include a list of prioritized vulnerabilites based on the andbook.cfm; vulnerability assessment and the IRWM’s decision making y/n 23/66 - 73 November 2012 process. Guidelines Legislative and Policy Context, p. Contain a plan, program, or methodology for further data 66 y/n 23/66 - 73 gathering and analysis of prioritized vulnerabilities §10541.( e )(11) Include climate change as part of the project review process y/n 23/68 Appendix * Requirement must be addressed. B - 17
Appendix C
RMM022807
Outlinefor Development of the TulareBasin Water Authority
The followingis thebeginnings of a conceptpaper that would outlinewhy andhow we could put togetheran organization charged with coordinatingthe developmentof a Tulare Basin-wideregional water planning effort. Thefirst step is to "outlinethe outline" to makesure we areproviding theright background and informationalset ting as wellas addressingthe rightquestions. The next stepwould be to "flesh out" the outlineinto a conceptualpaper.
1) Background: a) Localplanning efforts; b) Costaplanning effort; c) TheGovernor's SJV PartnershipInitiative; d) TheSN Blue Printeffort; e) SanJoaquin ValleyWater Coalition;
f) Coordination/interfacewith the SanJoaquin River Region; 2) Purposes: a) To becomplimentary to existing planningefforts which are primarily being done on a watershedbasis ... not to replace them; b) To accommodatethe areas whereexisting plans don't addressknown water managementneeds: i) From a geographic perspective; ii) From the kind of need; c) To providea certaindegree of coordinationbetween the existing planning efforts; d) To increasethe likelihood and ''reasonableness"of stateand federal grant and loanfunding by having a coordinatedprogram to addressthe Region's needs; e) To providea frameworkfor inter-regional cooperation on projects/programsof mutualbenefit. 3) Stateand Federal Fru,ding Opportunities (discussion of state andfederal preference/desiresrelative to regionalplanning efforts, moneys available, etc.)
Appendix C - 1 RMM022807
a) StateFunding: i) Prop 13; ii) Prop50; (1) IRWMPProgram:
(a) Planning grants; (b) Implementationgrants;
iii) Prop 84; iv) Prop lE;
v) AB 303; vi) Partnershipmonies. b) Federalmonies.
4) PotentialMembenbipllnvolvement: a) Thoseactively planning: i) Thosethat have preparedIntegrated Regional Plans:
(1) UpperKi ngs; (2) Poso Creek; (3) SanLuis and Delta Mendota WaterAuthority; b) Those thatare intending to prepareIntegrated Regional Plans: c) Thosethat areplanning waterresource activities under other authority: i) KaweahDelta WCD; ii) Deer andCreek Tule River Authority;
iii) Kern CountyWater A gency; iv) FriantWater Authority; v) TulareLake Basin WSD; d) Thoseentities/needs that logically fit under the auspicesof anexisting local planning effortbut have not beeninvited or for other reasons are on the sidelines;
Appendix C - 2 RMM022807
e) Thoseentities/needs that don't logicallyfit under the auspices of anexisting local planningeffort but arestill within the Tulare Basin Region;
f) Involvementof County governments; g) Involvementof incorporated cities (use of COGs or CAGs?); h) Involvementof environmentalinterests/needs; 5) How theTBWA Would Interact with Ex:lsting efforts: Planning a) Existingplanning efforts would beacknowledged as part of organizational framework... interactionwould be describedin detailin organizationalcreation documents. b} Descriptionof interactionwould includemechanism for deciding when a project falls underthe auspices of one of the existingplanning efforts or under the auspicesof thenew organization(TBWA). 6) PotentialOrgani'l8tion Forms and Governance: a) Degreeof organizationformalization needed? i) Being ableto acceptfunding and grant accountability; ii) Being able to makedecisions and set priorities;
iii) Having theproper authorities relative to planning,construction (?) other authorities(?)
b) Doesit needto be a publicagency? c) Who would sit as thegoverning body? d) How would votingbe done? e) How would thegeneral public be involved?
f) Discussalternative organizational formats that could meetthe agreed-to requirements- plussesand minuses ( once we haveanswers to the above questions); g) Operationalfunding requirements and sources; h) Staffing. 7) Timelines- WhatControls?
Appendix C - 3 RMM022807
a) To be effectivein dictatingthe allocation of the Prop84 - $60 millionearmarked forthe TulareBasin. Requiredmilestones: i) (listdates andevents) ii) b) To meetthe Governor,s Partnershipwater planning element needs- Required milestones:
i) (list dates andevents) ii) c) To meetCosta Planning effort needs - RequiredMilestones: i) (list dates andevents) ii) 8) FrequentlyAsked Questions: (starta list)
9) Whoto Contact:
Appendix C - 4
Appendix D
!. !. !. !.
!.
!. !.
!. !.
Legend N Surface Water Sampling Locations IRWMP Boundary Integrated Regional Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, ©Water OpenStreetMap Management contributors, Plan and the !. Surface Water Sampling Locations GIS user community, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS 1 in = 7 miles Appendix D - 1 User Community Date: 10/30/2017
Appendix E
Arsenic Data 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Terra Bella Irrigation District 2 2 2.01 2.02 2 2
Pixley Public Utility District 15.24 10 14 14 20.5 19.1 15.25 Tipton Community Service District 7.9 7.9 8.7 3.2 3.9 6.9 5.6 Poplar Community Services District 2.2 Woodville Public Utility District 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
City of Porterville 0.26 0.27 0.38 0.0002 0.0002 0.2 0.26 Maximum Contaminant Levels (Typical)* 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Public Health Goal 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004
Appendix E - 1 Hexavalent Chromium Data APPROXIMAT APPROXIMAT WELL NAME E LATITUDE E LONGITUDE CHEMICAL RESULT UNITS DATE DATASET COUNTY RB GW_BASIN_NAME 5410038-007 35.988 -119.107 CR6 1.1 UG/L 8/27/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 8/27/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-013 36.017 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 8/27/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7.3 UG/L 8/28/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.6 UG/L 8/28/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7.9 UG/L 8/28/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.4 UG/L 8/28/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-016 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.5 UG/L 2/6/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-036 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.5 UG/L 2/6/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 2/7/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1.4 UG/L 3/7/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1.1 UG/L 3/7/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-001 35.786 -119.186 CR6 1.2 UG/L 3/14/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 2.3 UG/L 4/25/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-004 36.075 -119.028 CR6 5.2 UG/L 5/1/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1.8 UG/L 5/1/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 6/10/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-004 36.017 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-006 35.988 -119.107 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-007 35.988 -119.107 CR6 1.2 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-009 35.988 -118.988 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-013 36.017 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-014 35.988 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-016 35.988 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-020 35.988 -118.988 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-024 35.988 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 6/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-002 36.046 -119.305 CR6 0 UG/L 6/12/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-004 36.046 -119.305 CR6 0 UG/L 6/12/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 CR6 1 UG/L 6/12/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 CR6 1 UG/L 6/12/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.5 UG/L 6/18/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 12 UG/L 6/18/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 5.1 UG/L 6/18/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.5 UG/L 6/18/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.9 UG/L 7/17/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 CR6 2.7 UG/L 7/17/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-016 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.1 UG/L 7/17/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-036 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.3 UG/L 7/17/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-016 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.4 UG/L 7/24/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1.2 UG/L 7/24/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400544-003 35.844 -119.345 CR6 8.9 UG/L 8/27/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.2 UG/L 9/18/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-004 36.075 -119.028 CR6 5.5 UG/L 10/3/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 CR6 3.1 UG/L 10/3/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-001 36.075 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 10/14/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-002 36.075 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 10/14/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400663-002 36.075 -118.988 CR6 5.1 UG/L 12/8/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400886-001 35.844 -119.226 CR6 7.1 UG/L 12/10/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-002 35.988 -118.988 CR6 0 UG/L 12/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-047 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1.5 UG/L 5/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 5/22/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-004 36.046 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 5/22/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-005 36.046 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 5/22/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400663-002 36.075 -118.988 CR6 4.2 UG/L 10/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401038-002 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 12/16/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400718-002 36.075 -119.146 CR6 0.1 UG/L 4/6/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.2 UG/L 9/28/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 3.1 UG/L 11/3/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 3.1 UG/L 2/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 3.3 UG/L 5/25/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.1 UG/L 8/30/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.2 UG/L 9/20/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.3 UG/L 6/11/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.2 UG/L 6/14/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 CR6 4.1 UG/L 7/19/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 2 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.8 UG/L 8/23/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-008 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.69 UG/L 9/16/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1 UG/L 11/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.3 UG/L 11/14/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7.2 UG/L 11/14/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 5.9 UG/L 11/14/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.9 UG/L 11/14/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.4 UG/L 2/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.1 UG/L 2/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 5.6 UG/L 2/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.7 UG/L 2/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.16 UG/L 3/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-039 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.15 UG/L 3/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-056 36.046 -119.067 CR6 0.03 UG/L 3/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-079 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.03 UG/L 3/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-008 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.55 UG/L 3/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-018 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.49 UG/L 3/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-019 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1.2 UG/L 3/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-021 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.26 UG/L 3/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-033 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.23 UG/L 3/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 CR6 2 UG/L 3/12/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-082 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.061 UG/L 3/12/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-088 36.017 -119.067 CR6 0.071 UG/L 3/12/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-090 36.017 -119.067 CR6 0.14 UG/L 3/12/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-037 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.97 UG/L 3/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-049 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.32 UG/L 3/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 CR6 2.8 UG/L 3/17/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.14 UG/L 3/17/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-023 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.21 UG/L 3/17/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-026 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.054 UG/L 3/17/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.059 UG/L 3/17/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-010 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.11 UG/L 3/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-013 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.24 UG/L 3/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 CR6 3.7 UG/L 3/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-096 36.046 -119.067 CR6 0.033 UG/L 3/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0.035 UG/L 3/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-025 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.082 UG/L 3/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.069 UG/L 3/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-040 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.15 UG/L 3/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-054 36.075 -119.067 CR6 0.35 UG/L 3/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-086 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.03 UG/L 3/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.4 UG/L 3/25/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-022 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.03 UG/L 5/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.9 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.6 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.4 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-004 35.959 -119.305 CR6 6.61 UG/L 7/31/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-005 35.959 -119.305 CR6 0.05 UG/L 7/31/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-006 35.959 -119.265 CR6 3.47 UG/L 7/31/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 CR6 9.7 UG/L 8/12/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-001 36.017 -119.305 CR6 2.2 UG/L 8/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-002 36.017 -119.305 CR6 1.9 UG/L 8/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-002 35.988 -118.988 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-004 36.017 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-009 35.988 -118.988 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-013 36.017 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-014 35.988 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-016 35.988 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-020 35.988 -118.988 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-024 35.988 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-025 35.988 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400600-001 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 8/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-002 36.046 -119.305 CR6 0 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-004 36.046 -119.305 CR6 0 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.6 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7.1 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 3 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 CR6 0 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 CR6 0 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 CR6 0.55 UG/L 8/25/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 8/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-004 36.046 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 8/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-005 36.046 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 8/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403140-001 35.815 -119.146 CR6 2.1 UG/L 9/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400886-001 35.844 -119.226 CR6 6.12 UG/L 9/25/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400735-001 35.815 -119.146 CR6 1.9 UG/L 9/30/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400542-004 35.902 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 10/3/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400542-005 35.902 -119.067 CR6 0 UG/L 10/3/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-001 36.133 -119.305 CR6 0 UG/L 10/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-003 36.133 -119.305 CR6 0 UG/L 10/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-001 36.075 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 10/30/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-002 36.075 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 10/30/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 11/4/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0 UG/L 11/4/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400604-003 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.5 UG/L 11/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.9 UG/L 11/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.9 UG/L 11/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.3 UG/L 11/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403054-001 36.017 -119.463 CR6 0.91 UG/L 11/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-001 35.786 -119.186 CR6 0.84 UG/L 12/1/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400544-003 35.844 -119.345 CR6 9.5 UG/L 12/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-003 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.2 UG/L 12/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-004 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.2 UG/L 12/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-005 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.43 UG/L 12/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-006 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.83 UG/L 12/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-007 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.39 UG/L 12/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-009 36.046 -118.988 CR6 2.2 UG/L 12/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-010 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1.5 UG/L 12/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400882-001 36.046 -119.146 CR6 0.2 UG/L 12/16/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403048-001 35.988 -119.305 CR6 2 UG/L 12/16/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400884-003 36.075 -119.107 CR6 0.5 UG/L 12/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400994-002 36.017 -119.028 CR6 1.4 UG/L 12/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400529-001 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 12/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400558-002 35.988 -119.186 CR6 1.7 UG/L 12/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400641-002 35.931 -119.265 CR6 6.2 UG/L 12/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400651-001 36.104 -119.067 CR6 0 UG/L 12/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400718-002 36.075 -119.146 CR6 0.5 UG/L 12/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403149-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.8 UG/L 12/22/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400964-001 35.786 -119.186 CR6 1.5 UG/L 12/31/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400655-001 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.5 UG/L 1/7/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.8 UG/L 2/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.3 UG/L 2/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400602-001 36.046 -118.948 CR6 1.4 UG/L 2/10/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400504-001 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0.2 UG/L 2/25/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400527-001 36.075 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 2/26/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401038-001 36.046 -119.028 CR6 0 UG/L 3/4/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-004 35.786 -119.107 CR6 0.2 UG/L 4/27/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-005 35.815 -119.107 CR6 0.71 UG/L 4/27/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7 UG/L 5/18/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.2 UG/L 5/18/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.2 UG/L 5/18/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.2 UG/L 8/20/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.5 UG/L 8/20/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.2 UG/L 8/20/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.6 UG/L 11/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.9 UG/L 11/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.3 UG/L 11/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8 UG/L 11/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-004 35.786 -119.186 CR6 1.4 UG/L 12/7/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403149-001 36.046 -118.988 CR6 0.5 UG/L 12/10/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.3 UG/L 2/11/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7.9 UG/L 2/11/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.2 UG/L 2/11/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.2 UG/L 2/11/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-098 36.017 -119.067 CR6 0.5 UG/L 3/11/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403038-001 36.046 -118.948 CR6 0 UG/L 4/11/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 4 5410048-001 36.075 -119.107 CR6 0.5 UG/L 4/14/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-002 36.075 -119.107 CR6 0.5 UG/L 4/14/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.1 UG/L 5/23/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.9 UG/L 5/23/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.2 UG/L 5/23/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.6 UG/L 5/23/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 CR6 9.2 UG/L 7/26/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.8 UG/L 8/18/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.8 UG/L 8/18/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.1 UG/L 8/18/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403204-001 35.844 -119.265 CR6 5 UG/L 9/6/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403204-003 35.844 -119.265 CR6 3.2 UG/L 9/6/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410050-004 35.873 -119.463 CR6 0 UG/L 9/8/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403140-003 35.786 -119.146 CR6 0 UG/L 9/23/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-004 35.786 -119.107 CR6 0.2 UG/L 9/29/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-005 35.815 -119.107 CR6 0.93 UG/L 9/29/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-005 36.133 -119.305 CR6 1 UG/L 9/30/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.3 UG/L 11/22/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9 UG/L 11/22/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9.2 UG/L 11/22/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.9 UG/L 2/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 6.3 UG/L 2/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 9 UG/L 2/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 CR6 2.8 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-008 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-019 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1.4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-021 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-022 36.046 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-033 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-039 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-049 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-082 36.046 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-086 36.046 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-096 36.046 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-002 36.075 -119.107 CR6 1 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-013 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-018 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 CR6 5 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-025 36.046 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-056 36.046 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-079 36.046 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-088 36.017 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-098 36.017 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 CR6 8.8 UG/L 4/26/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 CR6 5.8 UG/L 4/26/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7.4 UG/L 4/26/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 CR6 7.4 UG/L 4/26/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-010 36.075 -119.028 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 CR6 2.2 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-023 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-026 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-054 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-090 36.017 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-040 36.075 -119.067 CR6 1 UG/L 5/11/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-001 36.075 -119.107 CR6 1 UG/L 5/11/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 5 Nitrate Data 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Terra Bella Irrigation District 2 2 2 3 2 2 0 0 Pixley Public Utility District 9 10 9.37 9.37 12.5 9.43 3.01 3.01
Tipton Community Service District 9.9 7.9 12 21.5 17.5 14.5 3.3
Poplar Community Services District Woodville Public Utility District 33 33 34 38 38 45 38 City of Porterville 0.27 16.53 18.9 19.4 18.9 3 3 Maximum Contaminant Levels 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45
Appendix E - 6 Perchlorate Data APPROXIMATE APPROXIMATE CHEMICA WELL NAME LATITUDE LONGITUDE L RESULT UNITS DATE DATASET COUNTY RB GW_BASIN_NAME 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.6 UG/L 2/27/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400718-001 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/11/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/21/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/14/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/28/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/9/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.4 UG/L 11/14/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/28/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-005 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/28/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/5/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/5/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2001 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 9.08 UG/L 3/7/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.5 UG/L 4/11/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.05 UG/L 5/28/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/10/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.31 UG/L 6/26/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/23/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/15/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/26/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 9.3 UG/L 11/20/2002 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.7 UG/L 1/22/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-013 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-016 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-018 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-079 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-090 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 3 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 3 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 3 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 3 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 3 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/27/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7.6 UG/L 4/17/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-004 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/22/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/29/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/18/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/23/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-004 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-008 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-013 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-018 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-019 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-021 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-023 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-036 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-054 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-016 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-022 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-025 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-033 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-040 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-047 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-056 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-079 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 7 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-026 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-037 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-039 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-049 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-088 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-002 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/13/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/15/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/24/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/15/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.6 UG/L 11/16/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/18/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-047 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/11/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7.2 UG/L 12/31/2003 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7.9 UG/L 1/29/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7.6 UG/L 2/20/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.2 UG/L 3/19/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.7 UG/L 4/7/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.4 UG/L 5/26/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.4 UG/L 6/25/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/20/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/27/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/30/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.7 UG/L 12/22/2004 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6 UG/L 1/18/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.5 UG/L 2/22/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7.6 UG/L 3/11/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.9 UG/L 4/12/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.7 UG/L 6/20/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/20/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.7 UG/L 8/15/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.5 UG/L 9/14/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.8 UG/L 10/13/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.4 UG/L 11/16/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-01 35.886 -119.277 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 11/29/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-02 36.103 -119.2 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 11/30/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-03 36.114 -119.323 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 11/30/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-05 35.882 -119.052 PCATE 1 UG/L 12/5/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-04 35.789 -119.105 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/5/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-06 35.923 -119.088 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/5/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-07 36.068 -119.304 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/6/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.5 UG/L 12/7/2005 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-10 36.029 -119.099 PCATE 0.64 UG/L 12/7/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-08 35.968 -119.29 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/7/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-09 36.053 -119.021 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/7/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-11 35.829 -119.472 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/8/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-12 35.904 -119.43 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/8/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-14 35.979 -119.176 PCATE 0.94 UG/L 12/13/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-13 36.051 -119.135 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/13/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-15 35.869 -119.47 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/14/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-16 35.817 -119.213 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 12/14/2005 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7.1 UG/L 1/11/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/9/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-17 35.855 -119.326 PCATE 0.5 UG/L 2/28/2006 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 24 UG/L 4/17/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7 UG/L 5/15/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TUL1005 36.037 -119.12 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2006 GAMA TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TUL1006 36.014 -119.037 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/8/2006 GAMA TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TUL1062 36.054 -118.997 PCATE 5.8 UG/L 6/15/2006 GAMA TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.3 UG/L 6/19/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TUL1107 36.045 -118.946 PCATE 13 UG/L 6/22/2006 GAMA TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/17/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/15/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7.5 UG/L 9/11/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.2 UG/L 10/11/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.2 UG/L 11/13/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.9 UG/L 12/6/2006 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.7 UG/L 1/8/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.6 UG/L 2/5/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 8 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.5 UG/L 3/5/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.2 UG/L 4/9/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 5/8/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.2 UG/L 6/11/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/17/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/17/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/5/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400886-001 35.844 -119.226 PCATE 1 UG/L 11/16/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400604-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 11/21/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400655-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/29/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 12/3/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410050-004 35.873 -119.463 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/5/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-004 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-004 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-005 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-001 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/12/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-003 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/12/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400651-001 36.104 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/14/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-001 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/17/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-002 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/17/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403048-001 35.988 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-001 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-004 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-006 35.988 -119.107 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-007 35.988 -119.107 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-009 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-013 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-014 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-016 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-020 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-024 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/20/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-002 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/28/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400884-003 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 1 UG/L 12/31/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/31/2007 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6 UG/L 1/7/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403054-002 36.017 -119.503 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/8/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400882-001 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0.004 UG/L 1/8/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403054-001 36.017 -119.463 PCATE 0.004 UG/L 1/8/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401038-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/14/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-001 36.017 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/22/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-002 36.017 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/22/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400920-001 36.075 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/31/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.8 UG/L 2/4/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-001 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 1 UG/L 2/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-004 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 1 UG/L 2/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-005 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 1 UG/L 2/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-006 35.959 -119.265 PCATE 1 UG/L 2/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.6 UG/L 3/3/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-001 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/7/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-003 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/7/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400544-003 35.844 -119.345 PCATE 1 UG/L 3/26/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400600-001 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 1 UG/L 3/26/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.5 UG/L 4/7/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400641-001 35.931 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/21/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400641-002 35.931 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/21/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400663-002 36.075 -118.988 PCATE 1 UG/L 4/24/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400651-001 36.104 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/2/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 7 UG/L 5/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403048-001 35.988 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/8/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400542-004 35.902 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/14/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 9 5400542-005 35.902 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/14/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400994-002 36.017 -119.028 PCATE 1 UG/L 5/15/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-002 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400604-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 1 UG/L 5/20/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/2/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-002 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-004 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-007 35.988 -119.107 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-009 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-013 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-014 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-016 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-020 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/9/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400886-001 35.844 -119.226 PCATE 1 UG/L 6/10/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410050-004 35.873 -119.463 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/11/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-004 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-004 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-005 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/12/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 1 UG/L 6/19/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400558-002 35.988 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/20/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-024 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/23/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-001 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/24/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-002 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/24/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403054-001 36.017 -119.463 PCATE 180 UG/L 7/14/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403054-002 36.017 -119.503 PCATE 160 UG/L 7/14/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-001 36.017 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/14/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-002 36.017 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/14/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-001 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 1 UG/L 7/21/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-004 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 1 UG/L 7/21/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-005 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 1 UG/L 7/21/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-006 35.959 -119.265 PCATE 1 UG/L 7/21/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 8/4/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400882-001 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/19/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-001 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/19/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-003 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/19/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 1 UG/L 8/25/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-006 35.988 -119.107 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/27/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/2/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400884-003 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 1 UG/L 9/5/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400994-002 36.017 -119.028 PCATE 1 UG/L 9/5/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400600-001 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 1 UG/L 9/8/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400542-004 35.902 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400542-005 35.902 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/6/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.1 UG/L 11/3/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-05 35.882 -119.052 PCATE 0.82 UG/L 11/3/2008 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) TULE-10 36.029 -119.099 PCATE 0.75 UG/L 11/3/2008 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400994-002 36.017 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 11/25/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.1 UG/L 12/1/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 12/10/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-001 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/11/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/11/2008 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.6 UG/L 2/2/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-001 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/17/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-001 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/19/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/19/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400604-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 2/25/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.7 UG/L 3/16/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-001 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/17/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 10 5400792-002 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/17/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/1/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.8 UG/L 4/6/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400655-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/28/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-001 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/14/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/14/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401038-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/27/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401038-002 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/27/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/28/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-002 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/28/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/28/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.8 UG/L 6/1/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-001 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/4/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/4/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-010 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 6/11/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400558-002 35.988 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/22/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/29/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/6/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/14/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/3/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/6/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6 UG/L 9/8/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400655-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/17/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5 UG/L 10/5/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/2/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/2/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-002 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/2/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/2/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400641-002 35.931 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/10/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-001 35.786 -119.186 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/30/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/3/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400529-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/4/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5 UG/L 12/7/2009 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.1 UG/L 1/4/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.9 UG/L 2/1/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/11/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400735-001 35.815 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/4/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410050-004 35.873 -119.463 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/4/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 6.2 UG/L 3/23/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-096 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/29/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.3 UG/L 4/5/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/27/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-002 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/27/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/27/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400558-002 35.988 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/30/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.4 UG/L 5/3/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/13/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403140-001 35.815 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/9/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400527-001 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/29/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400529-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/1/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/6/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400604-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 8/2/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/5/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 8/9/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/12/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-096 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 8/19/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 9/7/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.2 UG/L 9/20/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/28/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/27/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-002 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/27/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/27/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5 UG/L 11/1/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-025 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/2/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 13 UG/L 11/4/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 12/6/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-006 35.988 -119.107 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403140-001 35.815 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/13/2010 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 1/3/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400718-002 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 2 UG/L 1/6/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 11 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 12 UG/L 2/7/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/7/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-018 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-021 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-033 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-039 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-049 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-096 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-008 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-013 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-022 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-056 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-079 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-082 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-086 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-088 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/9/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-019 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/10/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-002 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/10/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/10/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.3 UG/L 4/4/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.9 UG/L 5/2/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/5/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/12/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-004 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/12/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/12/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-004 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/12/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-005 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/12/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-002 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-004 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-007 35.988 -119.107 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-009 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-013 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-014 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-016 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-020 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-010 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-023 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-025 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-026 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-037 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-047 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-090 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-001 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/18/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/19/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/19/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/19/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-040 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/19/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-054 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/19/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/19/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/26/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/26/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/26/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/26/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/26/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/26/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/2/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400604-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 6/6/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/7/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/6/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/20/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/28/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/3/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/4/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 12 5401006-001 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-003 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-024 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/16/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/1/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/6/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/20/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/4/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/6/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-015 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 10/11/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/26/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-004 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 2 UG/L 10/28/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-005 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 2 UG/L 10/28/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-006 35.959 -119.265 PCATE 2 UG/L 10/28/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400558-002 35.988 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/3/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-001 35.786 -119.186 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403048-001 35.988 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/10/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403054-001 36.017 -119.463 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/15/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-010 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 11/15/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 11/15/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-082 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 11/15/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-086 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 11/15/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/8/2011 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/3/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/5/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403119-003 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/2/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/7/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400600-001 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/9/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/6/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/3/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 5.3 UG/L 5/7/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-082 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/11/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-086 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/11/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 6/5/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/11/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/17/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-082 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 8/1/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-086 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 8/1/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/7/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-024 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/14/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/4/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400882-001 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/11/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/2/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/6/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.1 UG/L 12/4/2012 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-004 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-005 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-006 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-007 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-009 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-010 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/8/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/4/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/5/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410050-004 35.873 -119.463 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/5/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/3/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/4/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-004 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-006 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-007 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-009 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-010 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/14/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/1/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400769-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 7/11/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 13 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/19/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/30/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-005 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/5/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-001 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/9/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-002 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/9/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-025 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/27/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/3/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400542-004 35.902 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400542-005 35.902 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/7/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 10/8/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/10/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 11/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/3/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-098 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/6/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403140-001 35.815 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/10/2013 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/4/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/25/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/4/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-008 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-013 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-018 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-019 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-021 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-033 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-039 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-056 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/25/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 3/25/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-022 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-049 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-079 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-082 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-086 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-088 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-096 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-002 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-004 35.786 -119.107 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/28/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/2/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/8/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400884-003 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/29/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/6/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400666-001 36.104 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/6/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/6/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-027 35.931 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-026 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-037 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-090 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-010 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-025 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-054 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-001 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-023 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-040 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 14 5410014-002 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410014-004 36.046 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-002 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-003 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-005 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/15/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-028 35.959 -119.067 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/3/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/19/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410025-004 36.104 -119.186 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/26/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/1/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/8/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 1510005-042 35.786 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/8/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/14/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/22/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/29/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-004 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 2 UG/L 7/31/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-005 35.959 -119.305 PCATE 2 UG/L 7/31/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410009-006 35.959 -119.265 PCATE 2 UG/L 7/31/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/5/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-001 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-003 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/11/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/12/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-002 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-004 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-009 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-011 35.959 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-013 36.017 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-014 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-016 35.988 -118.948 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-020 35.988 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-001 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-003 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410021-004 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/26/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410026-004 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/27/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/3/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/9/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/16/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/23/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4.5 UG/L 9/30/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400735-001 35.815 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/30/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-001 35.786 -119.186 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/7/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/13/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/20/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/28/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/4/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403048-001 35.988 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/10/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/12/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/18/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403054-001 36.017 -119.463 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/24/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/25/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/2/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/8/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE26 36.039 -119.024 PCATE 0.52 UG/L 12/10/2014 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/17/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE23 35.965 -119.073 PCATE 0.9 UG/L 12/17/2014 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/21/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/29/2014 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/7/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/12/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/15/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE15 36.135 -119.166 PCATE 0.54 UG/L 1/15/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/20/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/27/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/3/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/10/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 15 5403140-001 35.815 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/10/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/18/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400600-001 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 2/23/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/25/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE05 36.077 -119.387 PCATE 0.57 UG/L 2/26/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/3/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE03 35.998 -119.452 PCATE 0.1 UG/L 3/4/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE07 35.946 -119.327 PCATE 1.24 UG/L 3/5/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/10/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE24 36.049 -119.134 PCATE 0.86 UG/L 3/16/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE17 35.968 -119.143 PCATE 0.38 UG/L 3/16/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/17/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE04 36.057 -119.511 PCATE 0.1 UG/L 3/17/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE14 36.122 -119.254 PCATE 0.99 UG/L 3/18/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE13 36.061 -119.306 PCATE 0.64 UG/L 3/18/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE19 35.839 -119.23 PCATE 0.95 UG/L 3/23/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE06 36.053 -119.34 PCATE 0.64 UG/L 3/23/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE12 35.995 -119.274 PCATE 1.04 UG/L 3/24/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE09 35.831 -119.394 PCATE 0.1 UG/L 3/24/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/25/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE10 35.869 -119.263 PCATE 1.33 UG/L 3/25/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE18 35.932 -119.168 PCATE 0.85 UG/L 3/25/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE11 35.923 -119.274 PCATE 1.39 UG/L 3/29/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/30/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE22 35.911 -119.056 PCATE 2.17 UG/L 3/30/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE25 36.072 -119.006 PCATE 4.81 UG/L 4/7/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/7/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE30 35.797 -119.033 PCATE 0.1 UG/L 4/7/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE16 36.059 -119.143 PCATE 0.12 UG/L 4/8/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE21 35.861 -119.061 PCATE 0.12 UG/L 4/8/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/14/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE28 35.907 -119.038 PCATE 2.26 UG/L 4/20/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE02 35.872 -119.487 PCATE 0.1 UG/L 4/20/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/21/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400600-001 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 4/22/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE01 35.841 -119.467 PCATE 0.1 UG/L 4/27/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE08 35.919 -119.425 PCATE 0.1 UG/L 4/27/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/29/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) S4-TUSK-TLE29 35.874 -118.974 PCATE 0.43 UG/L 4/30/2015 USGS TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/5/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400767-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 5/5/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/12/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/19/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/26/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/2/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/2/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/9/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/9/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/16/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/16/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/23/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/23/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/30/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/30/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400504-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/7/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/7/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/15/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/15/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/21/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/21/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/28/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/28/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/3/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/3/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/11/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/11/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-024 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/17/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/18/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/18/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 16 5410021-002 35.873 -119.265 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/20/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/24/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/24/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400882-001 36.046 -119.146 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/9/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/9/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/15/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/15/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/22/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/22/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-005 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/2/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/6/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/19/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/19/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/27/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/27/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400604-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 11/2/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/4/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/4/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/9/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/9/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/17/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/17/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/23/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400544-003 35.844 -119.345 PCATE 2 UG/L 12/1/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-004 35.786 -119.186 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/7/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/8/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/8/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403149-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 2 UG/L 12/10/2015 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/12/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/12/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/9/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400504-001 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 2 UG/L 2/24/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/8/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-098 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 2 UG/L 3/11/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/7/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400886-001 35.844 -119.226 PCATE 2 UG/L 4/12/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/17/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401004-004 35.786 -119.186 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/15/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 6/27/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 7/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-003 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-004 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-005 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-006 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-007 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-010 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 7/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 8/3/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410038-025 35.988 -119.028 PCATE 0 UG/L 8/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410801-009 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 0 UG/L 9/1/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403204-001 35.844 -119.265 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/6/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403204-003 35.844 -119.265 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/6/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/13/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-004 35.786 -119.107 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/29/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-005 35.815 -119.107 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/29/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5401006-005 36.133 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 9/30/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 10/25/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 11/22/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 12/7/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410050-004 35.873 -119.463 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/8/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403140-003 35.786 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 12/16/2016 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410050-004 35.873 -119.463 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/4/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 1/11/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 17 5400792-001 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/30/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400792-002 36.075 -119.146 PCATE 0 UG/L 1/30/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403149-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 2/27/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403048-001 35.988 -119.305 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/7/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/14/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410024-005 35.815 -119.107 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/14/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-003 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-005 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-008 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-019 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-020 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-021 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-022 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-033 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-039 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-049 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-096 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-002 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/15/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-013 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-018 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-024 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-025 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-056 36.046 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-079 36.046 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-088 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-098 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 3/16/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 4/12/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5400935-001 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-006 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-009 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-010 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-014 36.075 -119.028 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-023 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-026 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-032 36.046 -118.988 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-054 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-090 36.017 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-092 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/10/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410010-040 36.075 -119.067 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/11/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5410048-001 36.075 -119.107 PCATE 4 UG/L 5/11/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-001 36.017 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/14/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13) 5403042-002 36.017 -119.305 PCATE 0 UG/L 6/14/2017 DDW TULARE 5 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY - TULE (5-22.13)
Appendix E - 18
Appendix F
Legend N Groundwater Well Locations IRWMP Boundary Integrated Regional Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, ©Water OpenStreetMap Management contributors, Plan and the DCTRA Groundwater Well GIS user community, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS 1 in = 7 miles Appendix F - 1 User Community Date: 10/30/2017
Appendix G
DENNIS R. KELLER DENNIS R. KELLER .aoe SOUTH LOCUST STREET CONSUL.TING CIVIL ENGINEER, INC, JAMES H. WEGLEY P.O. BOX 91 f JAMES H. WEGLEY CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEER, INC. CONSUL TING ENGINEERS VISALIA, CALIFORNIA 83279-0lil I PHONE 5158/7-112·7938 JAMES A. BLAIR, R.C.E. FAX 559/732-7937 Iii. MICHEAL CATES, R.C.I!:. [email protected] EDWARD D. GLASS, JR,, R,C.E, MEMORANDUM
DATE: August23, 2013
TO: Mark Larsen FROM: Dennis Keller SUBJECT: OUTLINEOF POTENTIAL TRAININGAND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES- KA WEAHDELTA WATERCONSERVATION DIS1RICT
A potentialarena for IRWM activities related to disadvantaged area drinking water activities is thatof technicalassistance. The U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Groundwaterand Drinking Watercurrent funding opportunity entitled "Training and TechnicalAssistance to ImproveWater Quality and Enable SmallPublic WaterSystems to Provide SafeDrinking Water'' provides an outline of trainingand technical assistance activities thatsegregated are into four (4)National PriorityAreas. Summarized below are the training and technical assistanceactiv ities which fall undereach of thoseareas which may have applicationto theKaweah River Basin: I. Trainingand Technical Assistance for Small Public WaterSystems to Achieveand MaintainCompliance with the Safe Drinking WaterAct: • Provide operatortraining and technical assistanceon how to comply with theSDW A, withemphasis on regulatory requirementswhich presenta particularchallenge forsmall systems; • Providetraining to decision makers and boardmembers regarding SDW A requirements; • Provide training/technicalassistance to diagnoseand trouble-shoot system operationaland compliance-related problems and identify solutions; • Provide training/technicalassistance and solutions to addressmicrobial, nitrate/nitriteand disinfection byproducts contamination; • Provide trainingand technical assistance to systems to help develop and implement sourcewater protection plans;
Appendix G - 1 • Conduct preliminaryengineering evaluations to assesstreatment, storage anddistribution system issues and identifylow-cost alternative technology and managementtechniques; and/or • Providetraining for operator certification and continuingeducation (CEU). Applicantsshould describe how they would obtainstate approval for CEU credits fortheir training courses. 2. Training andTechnical Assistance to ImproveFinancial and Managerial Capacityand Enable SmallWater Systems to Provide SafeDrinking Water: • Providetraining and technical assistance to improve the knowledge and skill competencyof drinking watersystem personnel in theareas of managerial andfinancial capacity; • Provide1raining sessions for water system managersand membersboard in assetmanagement, fiscal planning and other sustainable management topics; • Providetraining and technical assistance in assetmanagement program implementation; • Providetraining and technical assistance to developfinancial assessments andrate analyses; • Conductenergy audits andwater loss analyses determineto potential energy andwater efficiencies and cost savings;
• Workwith systems to conduct analyseson thepotential benefits of partnershipsand collaborationwith other systems, includingshared operatorsand treatment, restructuring consolidation, and thereby enabling them tobecome financially sustainable and to providesafe and affordable waterto theircommunities; and/or
• Assist systemsto accessand manage multiple infrastructure funding sources to addresspublic healthrisks and achieve compliance. 3. Trainingand Technical Assistance for Small Publicly-Owned WastewaterSystems and On-Site/DecentralizedWastewater Systems to help improvewater quality: • Preliminaryneeds analysis; • Considerationof alternativesfor treatment options, includingadvanced treatment,nutrient control, low impactdevelopment and other green infrastructurepractices; • Projectplanning and design; • Developmentof maintenanceschedules;
Appendix G - 2 • Assistance identifyingand applying for funding sources; • Assistance fonningresponsible management entities (RMEs) and supporting the developmentof a long-termbusiness plan; • Trainingof communityleaders, service providers and regulatory officials to assistin considerationof alternatives,highlight the importanceof management, facilitatecertification of installersand operators; • Outreachto individualsystem owners and the general public during the planningprocess 1ogain trust and support for solutions; and/or
• Outreachto individual systemowners and the general public on proper maintenancetechniques.
4. Trainingand Technical Assistance for Private Homeowners to Help ImproveWater Quality: • Developingand/or providing online andhard copyinfonnation and materialson topics of interestto private well owners,such as well construction,well maintenanceand operatio� well testing, groW1dwater quality andprotection, state regulations impacting private wells, water rights.and how to respondto well contaminationemergencies; • Providinginfonnation, technical assistance and trainingother to organimtionswith activities that affect private well owners; • Adequatelymaintaining a hotline withtoll-free a number for privatewell owners to call or timelyassistance adviceand on privatewell matters; • Providing electronicnewsletters or using socialmedia toprovide topical or emergency information quicklyto private wellowners with internet access; and/or • Educatingprivate well ownersthrough face-to-face visits regarding potentialor actualthreats to theirwells andwhom to contactfor help. We havestarted to watch forfunding opportunities for this approach to the water quality issue.We willnot pursueany pathway relatedto this approachto the alternativeILRP process withoutspecific direction from either you or theBoard.
Appendix G - 3 Appendix H Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Phase 1: Abstract Solicitation for Projects and Programs
The Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) is soliciting projects and programs to update the IRWM Plan full project list.
2018 Tule River Basin IRWMP http://www.tuleirwmp.com
Please see Section G – Project Solicitation, Selection, and Prioritization, which describes the solicitation process, how projects are scored, and the required conditions for a project/program to be incorporated into the IRWMP.
Project Solicitation, Scoring, and Selection Process
Phase 1 Abstract Forms Potential project proponents are Phase 1 are accepted and notified of project solicitation reviewed
Readiness to Proceed Objectives Worksheet Supplemental Scoring Phase 2 Worksheet Submitted Submitted and Scored Questions Answered and Scored
Stakeholder Projects are Evaluated Final Project Phase 3 Evaluation and for Technical Accuracy List Approved Board Approvals
New Concepts and Projects/Programs RWMG members, local public agencies, nonprofit organizations, Native American tribes, and interested stakeholders are invited to submit the attached Phase 1 Abstract Form for review and consideration on the IRWM project list update.
Phase 1 Abstract Form Deadline: Insert Date Submit via email (preferred) to: Insert Submission/Contact Information
Note: Project Proponents will be contacted whether a project or program will continue to Phase 2
Appendix H - 1 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Phase 1: Abstract Form
Project/Program Title: Sponsoring Agency/Organization:
Proponent Information:
Contact Name: Title/Affiliation: Address: Email: Phone:
Project/Program Description:
Project Website (if any):
Brief Project/Program Description (1-2 sentences):
Describe the most prominent need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address.
Project/Program Location:
Project Street Address or Nearest Intersection: Land Use (such as urban, rural, agricultural, etc.):
Appendix H - 2 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Technical Feasibility: The following is critical to making a determination of feasibility by showing how well the project adheres to the objective or goal. Applicants should provide technical justification for the proposed projects claimed physical benefits.
Discuss how the project was selected as the proffered alternative over other projects.
Describe alternative projects and the pros and cons with each.
Describe how this project is (or can be) integrated with other projects, creating synergistic regional benefits.
Funding Feasibility
Is the project considered to be the least cost alternative?
Has a benefit:cost or cost effectiveness analysis been completed for the project? If yes, please cite reference and briefly summarize. If no analysis has been completed, briefly describe how you would approach conducting such an analysis.
If known, please provide the Benefit:Cost Ratio.
If the benefits of the project cannot be monetized, explain why. Include whether the benefits can still be described and quantified.
Appendix H - 3 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Project Cost: If available, please provide the cost estimates as an attachment to the e-mail correspondence.
Total Estimated Capital Cost: Total Estimated Project Labor Costs: Estimated Project Life Cycle (Project Life): Annual Project Operations and Maintenance Cost: How will operations and maintenance costs be covered?
Explain how the project will reduce or minimize energy costs (if applicable)
Describe the source(s) of Funding for Capital Cost.
Describe the Source(s) of Funding for Operations and Maintenance Costs.
Appendix H - 4 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Project Readiness:
Anticipated Construction Start Date: Anticipated Project Completion Date:
Please indicate the status (pending, [0% complete], in process, complete) of the following (Note: Provide documentation for status of “in process” or “complete”):
Project Readiness Estimated Element Status % Complete Completion Date Feasibility Study Preliminary design Land Acquisition/Easements CEQA/NEPA Permit Acquisition Construction Documents Funding
Project/Program Benefits:
Does the project/program comply with the Tule River Basin IRWMP? Describe how the project addresses IRWMP Goals and Objectives (See IRWMP Section E) and relates to the State Resource Management Strategies (See IRWMP Section F).
Appendix H - 5 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Regional Distribution of Benefits:
Does the project provide specific benefits to disadvantaged communities (DACs) and/or Native American Tribal communities? If so, explain. Include how you would approach quantifying/demonstrating the degree of benefit.
Does the project distribute the benefits fairly over the region influenced by its implementation? If not, explain. Include how you would approach quantifying/demonstrating the degree of benefit.
Discuss how the project addresses any known environmental justice issues (i.e., implementation of environmental laws, regulations, and policies)?
Eligibility Criteria:
Per DWR requirements, all projects must show compliance with the following documents, if applicable.
Check Eligibility Criteria (check all that apply to the project) Box Groundwater Management Plan Urban Water Management Plan Water Meter Requirements Groundwater Monitoring Requirements AB 1420 Compliance BMP Compliance CEQA Compliance
Appendix H - 6 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Phase 2: IRWMP Objectives Worksheet
Project/Program Title: Sponsoring Agency/Organization:
Proponent Information:
Contact Name: Title/Affiliation: Address: Email: Phone:
Directions:
1. Mark an X next to the objectives your projects meets. 2. For any objectives marked, please provide a 1-2 sentence description of how the project meets that objective.
Goal: Maintain or improve the health of ecosystems within the region. Check Objectives Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Conserve, Enhance and Regenerate Riparian Habitats Conserve and Restore Native Species and Related Habitats Protect Water Resources that are critical to Native American Tribal Communities.
Appendix H - 7 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Goal: Protection of life, structure, equipment, and property from flooding. Check Objectives Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Evaluate and Modify Water Diversion and Conveyance Infrastructure Protect and Improve Water Resources through Land Use Practices
Goal: Reduction of contamination of surface and groundwater resources Check Objectives Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Meet Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan Objectives Manage Recreational Activities to Minimize Impacts on Water Resources Promote City, Community and Regional Storm Water Management Plans Evaluate and promote strategies to reduce arsenic, nitrate, and perchlorate contamination to levels below maximum contaminant level
Goal: Expand regional response to climate change through mitigation and adaption strategies Check Objectives Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Increase Monitoring and Promote Research Programs to Better Understand the Effects of Climate Change on Ecosystems in the Region Plan for Potential Regional Impacts of Climate Change on Water Quantity and Quality Identify and Promote Strategies for Hydroelectric Generation Facilities
Appendix H - 8 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Goal: Work toward achievement of sustainable balanced surface and groundwater supplies. Check Objectives Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Protect and improve water resources through land use practices. Optimize efficient use, conservation, and recycling of water resources. Increase knowledge regarding groundwater related conditions and establish groundwater management practices. Reduce impacts and optimize benefits from assisting in other drought-related areas with basin-to- basin transfers of water.
Appendix H - 9 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Phase 2: Readiness to Proceed Questionnaire
Project/Program Title: Sponsoring Agency/Organization:
Proponent Information:
Contact Name: Title/Affiliation: Address: Email: Phone:
Directions: 1. For each question, mark an X next to the response that most applies to the proposed project/program. (Mark one response only for each question) 2. For the response marked, please provide a 1-2 sentence description of why the response was selected.
How soon can the project/program be implemented without additional funding or new agreements? Check Possible Responses Description (1-2 Sentences) Box
<1 year
1-3 years
3-6 years
>6 years
Appendix H - 10 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Does technical documentation exist to evaluate the technical feasibility of the project? Check Possible Responses Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Project has detailed documentation, including feasibility studies and completed engineering designs. Project is partially documented and has reconnaissance and/or feasibility studies but incomplete or partial designs. Feasibility studies have not yet been completed and the project has not been designed.
Does the project/program have the necessary environmental documentation? Check Possible Responses Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Environmental documentation is complete. Some studies are completed and a clear plan to complete environmental documentation exists. No environmental studies have been completed and environmental compliance documents have not been started.
Does the project have required permits or plans to obtain them? Check Possible Responses Description (1-2 Sentences) Box All required permits are obtained or in the process of being obtained. Permit requirements are known and there is a plan and schedule in place to obtain them. Permit requirements are not known.
Appendix H - 11 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Is funding for the project secured? Check Possible Responses Description (1-2 Sentences) Box Financial plan and commitments are well defined and include resource commitments to maintenance and operations Financial plan is under development and/or awaiting rate payer and/or funding agency approval. No defined resource commitments to maintenance and operations exist. Financial plans and commitments have not been established for project implementation or for maintenance and operations.
Appendix H - 12 Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)
Phase 2: Supplemental Scoring Questions (Optional)
Project/Program Title: Sponsoring Agency/Organization:
Proponent Information:
Contact Name: Title/Affiliation: Address: Email: Phone:
Questions:
1. Does the project/program contribute to climate change adaption? This may include the following: • The project address climate change vulnerabilities as identified in the Tule River Basin IRWMP, Section O – Climate Change. • The project addresses changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
If yes, please Describe:
2. Does the project/program contribute to reducing GHG emissions? This may include the following: • Implementation of the project/program results in the reduction of GHG emissions as compared to project alternatives. • The project/program will help the IRWM region reduce GHG emissions over the 20-year planning horizon. • The project/program will reduce energy consumption.
If yes, please Describe:
Appendix H - 13